Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: AKDejaVu on August 08, 2002, 10:23:04 PM
-
...for unlimited play.
Just got the e-mail today.
-
same new release looks pretty good to.....
-
When they get down to 5 bucks ill give it another try.
-
Somebody try it out and tell me if the aircraft fly around like the control cables have way too much slack in them or if they wallow like they're at 40K when they're really at 20k.
If they fix the cables and they start flying like there's actual dense airflow going over the wing and control surfaces, I'll give it another shot.
-
The price of WB isn't the problem, it's the product . I used to play it when it was 1.99 and hour because it was the best game in town, since then the only thing that has improved is the price .
-
Take an F-86.
Push the stick all the way to the side.
Hold stick until the F-86's wings are verticle.
Center stick.
F-86 continues to roll, in fact it rolls further than it had up until the stick was centered.
-
the roll procedure there is roll left then center wait 2 secs for inertia to stop then roll right then center and wait again then left.
They say thats realistic but since I am not a pilot I dont know.
They still have 80% lethality and otto gunners and "buff-tuff" still goes up and down depending on who whines the most.
Ground vehicles have otto gunners.
hey also have "drone bombers" now with a few good features such as setting formation and distances. However they are air started and wait over head for you to up and join then. The must rediculous thing is bombers dont even have to bomb anything they just need to get ord in side the boundaries of the field for it to have an effect on closing it.
One of the stupidest things I ever heard of. You thot "fluffing" was bad in AH pre 1.10 where even though you had a laser sight you still had to hit something for it to count. Buff tough, otto gunners and no skill you can be a wb fluff. It will cost ya an extra 5 bucks though. :rolleyes:
Guess what happens in the "WWII areana" lo level allied fluffs close all the fields with no effort.
Other then that it looks better.........
-
That's a good move. If the price would get more players, it would be a good distraction to play 20 hours a month, and worth it.
I like the graphics, limited views kinda, planeset, and bombers.
I'm torn on the FM of the planes. The controls do seem 'muddy' for lack of better words.
Course, in the one time I flew a actual plane of any performance, a MetroIII, which is a twin engine turboprop, I just couldn't believe how heavy and sluggish it felt. Wouldn't it be like a 110 or a Ju88 or something? Dunno, some actual pilots here ought to know, that has flown some T-6's or anything close to WWII type aircraft. I know Hitech flew a P51, and Robert Shaw certainly would have a good opinion. Would love to here his for sure.
Certainly there is some liberties taken in AH and WBS interpreting FM, rightfully so. I hate to discount one or the other out of what's peoples opimion is with no actual flight time. Seems more what is funner to fly, or what everyone is used to. And that's to be expected.
I have a hard time believing either is spot on. Especially after reading "The Big Show" by Closterman. His constant mention of overheating engines, although another modelling topic, is a sure warning sign about "realistic."
-
It's only $19.95 if you pay upfront for 6 or 12 months which is still $5 more than AH for less sim IMO. Warbirds III can be fun but dwindling numbers are a big turnoff. The new shadows are very nice and everything cast's realistic shadows. Finally got my favourite ride from WBII...the Mosquito Mk4. The latest release is a step in the right direction but a years neglect from iEN is showing and now they have a hell of a hill to climb to catch to competition from AH, WW2OL and soon to be Targetware's sims.
-
Well, I can say THIS one doesn't take 2 seconds to stop rolling when you center the stick. Doesn't take 2 seconds to GET rolling when you move the stick. It's not sluggish. It's not "heavy" on the controls.
-
"It's only $19.95 if you pay upfront for 6 or 12 months "
Doh! Never mind.
Too bad, I'd like to see the “AH Spirit Team” don spiffy skirts and half time show sticks with colorful paper mache foo foo's, and then argue FM and engine performance. (IL-2 IS more realistic)
There was a Allied engine run for thousands of hours in a test stand at WEP, Clostermann just flew all bad planes.
Ask Funky.
-
you can dress her up, add makeup and give her a smile but she's still the same underneath.
-
Can you change WB icon colors (hue) yet?
-
I'm fresh outta rat's asses.
-
yup. IMO IL2 is more realistic in it's FM.
gun flahes are annoying though.
-
Warbirds III is getting better but if they want me to commit to 6 or 12 months payment up front I want to see how much commitment 'Groundhogday' Bill Stealey is going to show to Warbirds. Stealey is more interested in other titles he can make off the back of the WB engine IMO and I feel this is distracting hte team as work is done on his 'ASS' :rolleyes: (good grief could they not come up with anything worse?)
-
Il2 is more realistic in it's FM.... depending on whether or not it will get revised again in it's next patch. ;)
-SW
-
If new sucribers also have to pay up front for six months to get that price,then it seems to me they're just grabbing the money and don't expect you to stick around.
No thanks.
-
I don't have IL2, never had the demo or the latest release.
Sat next to Milo at the con and he loaded it up and I watched him fly it.
Seemed pretty "wallowy" to me as I watched him saddle up on buffs and shoot at them.
So, any comments on that? As I said, I haven't "flown" it, so I can only speak from watching Milo struggle to hold it steady. Could have been Milo, for all I know. :)
-
IMO you really need to spend some time adjusting the sensitivity of the joystick. Once I did that I got away from the 'wallowy' feeling.
-
Since the thread is about cost. I have to admit that IL2 has intrigued me, in that regard. Looking around other game sites, I have discovered that there are still people playing EAW online. 8 player, I guess. I think it was about 20 bucks new. and it has lasted for years. IL2 is about 40$ and may last for years also. 32 players is a big enough furball to require your SA skills. You have to wonder about paying 160 to 240 dollars a year for a bunch of people playing on the other side of an arena.
I did try IL2's demo. It felt a little wallowy. I suspect that has more to do with what I am use to (AH), then realism. People say the demo is not the same so that is probably meaningless any way.
-
Unless they've released a new demo I've not heard about the old one does'nt do the latest patched IL-2 justice. Feels different to WB or AH but then FM's are such a subjective thing I could'nt really say which was the most accurate. A very beautiful game engine with plenty of eye candy and good fun for a quick firball online but I don't subscribe to the opinions of some that it can replace either WB or AH due to it only being 32 player.
-
Il-2 is very, very fun, once you get used to it. Some planes wallow, some don't, but trim is more important in the game than in others that I have played IMHO.
-
Trim use to be important in AH ;)
-
i had quite a time finding the right stick settings in il2. after that it was quite steady. Theres quirks but its pretty fun.
trim is an important part of il2.
-
I have read posts the point out the weakness of the guns, in IL2? I just left the MA, where I lit uup a Nik, with a P38. EIGHT times, at 120 yards. Never fazed him. I am a little sensitive about guns right now.:)
-
Once again.. but undoubtedly not for the last time... if a person were to think that trim is a major factor (or should be "real important" in a normal acm situation) that person would be mistaken.
Perhaps, and only perhaps, trim would assume a more important role at the extreme ends of the flight envelope during an acm engagement.
Trim relieves stick force, primarily in mostly static situations (ie: cruise flight).
Trim relieves stick force, primarily in mostly static situations (ie: cruise flight).
Trim relieves stick force, primarily in mostly static situations (ie: cruise flight).
:D
That's really what it is designed to do.
If the pilot is a normal, fit individual the nearly ever changing stick forces in a "dogfight"-type acm engagement wouldn't really be improved or altered by constant trimming this way and that on the elevator. In fact, it might be detrimental overall in terms of not doing other much more important things with your throttle hand.
I know it's hard for some of you to accept but.....
TRIM IS NOT A PRIMARY FLIGHT CONTROL!
....nah, this isn't a "hot button" issue with me. ;)
-
Tell me toad, where was the auto take off button located in the F4U. Or the CT button in the P51. Gemme a brake. Its just a game. HT has made it clear that its a game first. So the question is only, which is more fun?
-
Without retrimming a Mosquito in WBIII will not be controlable at 410mph. That seems wrong to me.
I do like the way WBIII enemy icons turn grey once the aircraft has taken fatal damage.
-
Interesting comparisons there Easymo.
Trim....... real aircraft trim..... simply lessens unnecessary workload on the pilot.
For example, you trim for level flight in cruise so that the aircraft will basically stay where it is without constantly minding the stick. This allows you to change radio frequencies, look at a chart, etc. It just eliminates some of the routine workload, allowing you to do something else.
Auto takeoff on the F4U? Same purpose. Who amongst us (that has a few weeks experience) has any difficulty whatsoever in taking off in an AH aircraft? Auto takeoff eliminates some of the routine workload... so we can hit the head, grab another beer or call and order a pizza. Just like trim in a real aircraft, eh? Doesn't affect the FM in the least.
Combat Trim in a P-51? There'd be absolutely no need for Combat Trim in AH if the importance of trim itself hadn't been overemphasized in the intial programming. Trim was made WAY too important and WAY to effective. CT merely was an attempt to ameliorate that situation. So, in this case, CT is a device used to correct a non-routine workload that really shouldn't be there anyway.
But incorrectly and/or deliberately programming trim to act as a primary flight control? Flight model flaw, IMO. Relatively serious one as well. Similar to giving any flight control too much effect. Incorrect in any Flight Simulation, whichever one does it.
Now to perhaps the crux of your post. Fun.
You find the need to use trim in a manner that trim was really not designed to be used "fun".
I'd say it's simply an artificial "difficulty level" setting. Now you may find it more "fun" to artificially set the "difficulty level" higher and I would never argue your opinion there.
To me, it falls into the same category as having the projectiles from the guns artificially disappear from the programming at anything over 250 yards. It would be more difficult, because you'd always have to be in close. Some would undoubtedly find it more "fun" as well. But as an attempt to simulate WW2 gun ballistics it would simply be an error.
Auto take off? A minor compromise. Don't like it? Simple, don't use it. Because using it or not using it really doesn't provide an advantage to a player.
CT? An attempt to correct an flaw in the FM. Don't like it? Don't use it. In this case NOT USING it enhances a player's ability to dogfight if it is used correctly and competently while USING CT actually slightly hampers a player's ability to dogfight. Big difference here between this and auto takeoff. Using trim ahistorically and contary to its true design function actually provides an advantage.
More fun to have an FM feature that is ahistoric and contrary to its original design function? That would be an opinion.
More realistic to have it that way? Absolutely not and that's not opinon. :D
-
Hey Toad, when he was wallowing, did he have the screen zoomed? I have noticed the effect when I am in the zoomed view, myself.
AKSwulfe, your memory must be short; every sims FM changes with updates, including this one. That has nothing to do with the "correctness" of the FM, it just means that they were able to refine it further in some way(or fix a boo-boo).
-
Toad. They all claim to have the most realistic FM (AH,WB,IL2). They all point at the numbers. Yet, they are all different. How can that be? 2x2=4 in any language. I think you have just picked out something that you like. And are pointing for all your worth.
I don't believe for a second that WW2 aircraft where this easy to fly. They were the "state of the art" hot rods of their time. In leu of ALL the the stuff we don't have to bother with. And there was a lot to keeping one of these things in the air, from what I have read. IMO keeping the plane in trim is a small trade off at that.
-
FWIW, all I did was mention trim was important in Il-2. Oh, and did I mention it was fun?
-
Well said Easymo.
And I think it would be a nice option to micro manage realistic WWII aircraft systems, just s HTC caters to new flyers with auto take-off and CT.
Would that be well spent product development resourses? Pry not, but the core players would dig it. Maybe they could get DRip employed, and he would damn near "automate" the process.
-
Yeah well, I'm here from Air Warrior and I want photon torpedoes and warp drive. I didn't sign up to play Aces High because I wish to waste brain space on worrying about which plane can do what and in fact I don't know the difference between an aerilon or a rudder- nor do I care. All I care about is that if I pull the trigger the bad guys die. We need unlimited gas, unlimited ammo and instant aerial spawning in the MA. You realism freaks are the type of guys who spend your lifes savings on realistic 5 thousand dollar love dolls instead of a 7.99 inflatable hand. Guys, it's all fake.
-
From Flight Maneuvers Manual for Instructors and Students 1969, 1888
Trim Tab - A small auxiliary airfoil, usually attached to a movable control surface to aid in its movement, or to effect a slight displacement of it for the purpose of trimming the airplane for varying conditions of power,load or airspeed.
Elevator - The Elevators control the movement of the airplane about the lateral (pitch) axis. Raising the elevators forces tail down and raises nose and lowering elevators forces the tail up and lowers the nose. Elevators control the angle of attack.
Toad is dead right on this one. What you have in the game is a auxiliary elevator. That is not what
trim was designed to do. Can anyone say the trim in the game does not fit the description of an elevator?
Easymo, flying a plane out of trim is not a big deal at all. Beacuse conditions of power,load or airspeed are changing most of the time. It's necessary to retrim the airplane if the pilot wants to fly hands free or to relieve the back pressure on the stick. Other wise it's up to him.
When I learned to fly my instructor never touched the trim for anything other than to fly hands off. Or to help hold the plane in a given climb rate so you didn't have to use as much arm strength to holded the stick back.
We never first set the climb angle with the trim as you can in AH.
Gy
-
Not to insult, but most simply fail to understand what trim does for the pilot and where in the flight regime it does it for him. There also seems to be a mistaken idea that perfect trim at all times somehow enhances aircraft performance or capability.. like it provides a better turn radius or something. It relieves stick force and is used mostly in relatively static, unchanging conditions. That's what it does.
Now, making this a prime feature of the performance aspect of a game flight model is just wrong. It's like making gun range a variable dependent upon whether the pilot brushed his teeth before flight.
You want more complexity? Fine, put it where it belongs however. Trim most certainly isn't it. Trim is REAL simple and does not really effect aircraft performance except possibly at the extreme edges of the envelope.
*****
As far as how difficult they were to fly, just remember that during the war young kids fresh off the farm got 9 weeks, ~60 hours, in Primary Trainers, 9 weeks , ~ 70 hours in Basic Trainers and 9 weeks ~ 70 in Advanced Trainers. Then they got about 2 months of Transition Training, maybe another 100 hours, after which they were generally deemed "combat ready".
So 300 hour "boy" pilots were more than capable of handling these complex systems.
I think you'll find, if you care to ask the old vets, that by the time they had 500 hours under their belt the flying part was second nature to them and didn't require much of their attention. 500 hours isn't that much.
You really should go for a ride in a T-6 or something. It has all the basic systems that the fighter does. You'll be amazed at how easily it is to manage the systems in flight once you know a bit about them and become familiar with them. The perception that a WW2 pilot was constantly flying about the cockpit switching this and adjusting that is simply....... incorrect. But don't take my word for it... buy yourself a nice birthday present and go see for yourself.
-
Toad, trim in AH makes a stable plane, and gun platform. I use it exclusive. My Saitek throttle fwd hat switch is used constant, so much I can fly the plane with it if needed.
CT trim in AH makes you lose a edge, as manual up trim on the elevator turns you better.
How this effects the real planes comparison, I dunno.
As for the 300 hour “boys” , they pry just ruined engines, and then died before the mtx crew could beat the toejam out em. Any Private Pilot course instructs to manage the engine. You don’t just gun it, drop alt at a whim cooling it off, rinse, repeat. The cylinders warp outta the block. Again, I just laugh at the guys that quote WEP test stand documents. WWII high performance aircraft would keep you managing the engine more than navigation. IL-2 models it.
Would you have a workload in AH even in a trainer like a T6 Texan?
No.
I’d like AH to be modeled after a real 2000hp WWII fighter though. Wouldn’t you?
(At least skill selectable, much like the perks ideal)
--------
-
As for the 300 hour “boys” , they pry just ruined engines, and then died
Well, my father was one of the thoses 300 hour "boys" and in his log book had 270.6 hours after moving out of advance training. I can assure you that anyone that ruined engines "washed out" of flight training in big hurry.
Gy
-
Originally posted by Creamo
Toad, trim in AH makes a stable plane, and gun platform.
Agree. But it shouldn't. Trim really doesn't affect whether an aircraft is a "stable gun platform" or not. Aircraft design does that. Trim just relieves stick pressure, that's all it does. You work on 'em.. you know what it's supposed to do.
Originally posted by Creamo
I use it exclusive. My Saitek throttle fwd hat switch is used constant, so much I can fly the plane with it if needed.
Again, this shouldn't be necessary; that's the point.
Originally posted by Creamo
CT trim in AH makes you lose a edge, as manual up trim on the elevator turns you better.
Agree again. However, it SHOULD NOT have that effect. (Except possibly, in a very few aircraft, at the extreme edges of the flight envelope.)
Originally posted by Creamo
How this effects the real planes comparison, I dunno.
It's bogus. Now you know. :)
Originally posted by Creamo
As for the 300 hour “boys” , they pry just ruined engines,
No, they didn't. They went to war and did their jobs. They dropped bombs and shot down fighters. Some died in the learning process, some became aces or Bomb Group leaders. By and large they became well skilled in their trade. These were young men with what we would now consider little training.
Originally posted by Creamo
Would you have a workload in AH even in a trainer like a T6 Texan?
I've got some time in the T-6 and quite a bit more in the very similar BT-13. I don't find them any harder to fly than AH. It's just different, not necessarily "harder". Some aspects of AH are WAY harder than flying one of these. Some things in AH are way easier. But overall, neither one is problem to fly; it's just different.
There's another misconception amongst many that do not fly about "workload".
It isn't constant. You don't take off and have this big, constant workload. Not then in the T-6 or P-51 or B-25 or now in a F-16 or B2.
Work load is not low before takeoff and then high all during flight and low again after landing.
Work load varies. It's high in pre-flight (lots to do), low in taxi, high in takeoff, lower after cleanup and during climbout, very low in cruise, rises as you prepare to execute particular maneuvers or prepare for combat and then reduced again as you actually do the maneuvers or fly combat, low in cruise again, rises a small amount on descent,... well, you get the idea. It varies.
Originally posted by Creamo
I’d like AH to be modeled after a real 2000hp WWII fighter though. Wouldn’t you?
Sure! It'd help my score I think.
Seriously, I think what many folks perceive a P-51 to be like in terms of "difficulty" is a far cry from what they would actually experience if they went to Stallion 51 and flew one. Ask HT how well his PC flying skills from games transferred over to flying at Stallion 51.
The workload isn't nearly as high as some would like to believe and it isn't maxed out when it's time to do the actual fighting. Think about it. They designed the planes to kill other planes. If they intended to win, would they try to make that task overly complex or as easy as possible?
Trim, however, is simply a means to reduce stick pressure, primarly in routine non-maneuvering flight. :D
Become one with the Cosmic Trim Tab; the truth will set you free. :)
Nite all!
-
Agreed, agreed, agreed, blah...
I've got some time in the T-6 and quite a bit more in the very similar BT-13. I don't find them any harder to fly than AH
roadkill. 90% of the AH players couldn't start a WWII fighter, I'd like the F4.0 model approach. Plus the views are liberal as Sandman is gay and wants to kiss death row killers.
And AH is a game.
They got the FM down to a point, lets get some systems models.
-
Combat Trim.
The first facts you must understand about trim is that there is no way possible to
Make it work like a real plane. The joystick interaction with the controls is a complete different
Mechanical setup.
In a real plane you would be holding the stick back to maintain level flight.
You would then turn the trim knob to relieve any pressure on the stick, with out the stick moving.
With a computer joystick this simply isn't possible. When you let go of the stick it will always go back to center.
Even force feedback sticks do not have the ability of adjusting stick spring center. -----
HiTech
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If we are just going to make it up. Lets make it something that at least requires conscious thought.
easymo
-
That's 2 in a row.
-
Easy you can see there were compromises made just to add trim.
It doesn't work like it would in RL. It became another way of controlling the aircraft and actually improves aircraft performance instead of just a means of relieving stick pressure.
BTW, you know the autopilot simply "flies" (works through) the trim model right? :D
In any event, the importance of trim is mis-modeled (overmodeled) in most sims. Mistrimming a plane isn't the end of the world, merely an inconvenience.
-
Originally posted by Creamo
roadkill. 90% of the AH players couldn't start a WWII fighter
Neither could the cadets in 1942 when they first showed up on the flight line. But it probably took all of 10 minutes to show them how. After that they had it.
AH players would learn even faster. It's a simple internal combustion engine for Pete's sake!
I'll make a wager beyond that. Give me someone who's played this game for a while and I'll have him doing decent patterns and landings in a WW2 trainer in an hour. Toughest thing to teach is the landing "picture" and most vets around here would figure it out toot sweet.
Some people like to make out that flying WW2 aircraft requires a degree in quantum physics or something. It takes far more judgement than anything else.
27 weeks from Cadet to rated pilot in WW2. How long you been playing PC flight sims? A lot of it transfers.
Originally posted by Creamo
Plus the views are liberal as
Too bad you weren't at the Con. Robert Shaw discussed icons and views and RL visual cues very briefly. He summed it up real well. I don't think he'd agree with you. I think they filmed his whole talk; maybe you can get it from HT. Or maybe somebody else that was there will tell you what he said. :D
Originally posted by Creamo
They got the FM down to a point, lets get some systems models.
Systems? Sure, why not? We could model having to raise the gear. Let's see, that's moving a little lever up a few inches with one hand. We could maybe substitute a keypress or something. That the type of stuff you have in mind? :D
You want complexity? Have them model the old "coffee grinder" radio tuners. There's a pain!
Prop Controls and Mixture aren't complex. They're just two levers on the throttle quadrant. After you use them a few times, they're as second nature as putting in and letting out the clutch when you shift gears in a manual shift car. It isn't rocket science.
Hey, how about this for complexity... to make a turn you have to hold down the "q" and "m" keys at the same time (no stick mapping now!) while moving the stick left or right and using your nose to continuously tap the space bar.
That'd be complex, right? Wouldn't have anything to do with flying, but it'd be complex at least. Heck, it'd be like the trim models we see in the current games.
-
Not that it has anything to do with anything, but I soloed in ultralights in 1.5 hours, mainly because of the familiarity I had with flight sims. As Toad mentioned, the landing pattern and the look of the approach was the only thing that really presented anything approaching a problem, and after a circuit or two, it wasn't a prob. I've since flown light aircraft with similar results (no, I don't have my license).
Creamo and Easymo have a point WRT systems and views in a way... I really do like the views offered by sims like WWIIOL or Il-2. It's always a bit disjointing to come back and play AH and remember I have a straight-six view. It's also interesting to go on autopilot once in a while and watch the controls work inflight (Il-2), especially landing pattern. Of the three mentioned sims, none give me the feeling of leaning forward in the cockpit of a taildragger sitting on the ground like Il-2. Nuances like that are interesting and give sims flavor.
AH is AH, Il-2 is Il-2, and the rest are what they are. If stuff is added to make AH more complex I will like it or not. In the end, there are plenty of options for me to take to get my thrill for simulation.
-
Now wait just a Golly-geen minute. All this talk about learning to run complex WWII fighters in 10 minutes is just killing my image of those super responsible sky knights we all call pilots. I was sure modern pilots were wrestling massive complex computer inputs via the CDU that one small mistake would lead to countless casualties. They do, but the WWII guys didn't maybe?
Hell, Im just arguing to argue, but really would like to have cockpits that resemble WWII planes in a WWII game, and something to do, or at least be aware of regarding aircraft systems. IL-2 does it to some degree, (engine heat, prop pitch etc,)which is features, not a nuisance.
I gotta admit, you DO look good with pom poms and pig tails. Seems like alot of effort though defending simple, fair game enhancing effects that simply are missing from AH.
-
Not defending or promoting anything.. just trying to clear up a few obvious major misconceptions. Like the totally bogus idea that trim is a primary flight control.
Sometimes it's like trying to explain color to a blind man though. 'Cause people take a simple statement like "teach them to start engines in 10 minues" and turn it into "completely mastering a WW2 fighter in 10 minutes or less" just for the sake of argument.
Pilots are just normal folks. No trick to being one if you have reasonable intelligence, reasonable hand/eye coordination and the desire to do it. And the brains to recognize a "good deal" at an early age and prepare yourself to get the job. :D
Of course, it's not nearly as "manly" as being the guy that actually wields an actual 1/2" wrench.
:p
-
To quote Admiral Akbar, "Its a trap!".
Which is apropos to, "Nothing".
-
Toad, for me AH trim works just like you say it should. Auto-speed and auto-level keep reduce stick forces so i can take my hand off it.
Typical situation for me is I'm trimmed for climb when I spot a furball. First thing I do is manually dail in some left rudder trim and a heap of down elevator, enough to get me roughly trimmed for 300+ speeds. I do that because I'm used to fighting that way. At high speeds it's in trim, and when it gets slow I naturally pull back alot more on the stick and add right rudder rather than re-trimming. On the other hand it feel wierd to me flying fast in a plane trimmed for low speed, though I could fight just as well if I were used to it.
Improving turn performance in AH with trim is BS. All it does is reduce the stick deflection (and force) required to do it. The exception is at compression speeds where trim can be used to pull out of a dive. But I understand real pilots did that too.
The max amount of trim you can put in may be to much, since you can get enough to black out in most planes. I dunno about that since I've never flown anything. But all those things you said trim should do is pretty much what I use it for in the game.
-
As I said, the autopilot functions through using the trim modeling. So the "autopilot" feature is really "auto trim". And that does work correctly for a static situation like a default climb. It's merely pitch trimming to hold an airspeed. No biggie, that's what it's supposed to do.
As to increasing turn performance, it does. Try this.
Take a 109 and go into a hard turn using elevator travel only, no trim. Get to full aft stick, then trim full nose up. Tell me if the rate increases.
Now HT said they changed it in 1.04 so that end elevator angle would be the same using trim or not.
However, it seems like it still adds angle in a Mustang; it seems like it still adds angle in a FM2. I use it all the time. I trim for a rough corner speed and when I'm saddled and the fight degenerates into a turn fight with the stick full aft and the stall horn whining, I just hit the nose up trim and watch the nose move right out in front of him.
I see an increase in my rate. I'm not supposed to see it since 1.04 but it's working for me.
-
Well I see why we disagree on trim improving turn rate. With my setup, full aft stick *always* causes immediate stall and spin if done at low speed. This happens for me in every plane regardless of where the trim is set. Even with full nose down trim I can easily stall a 109 at any speed up to corner velocity.
The one exception for me is the spit1. I can hold full aft stick for several seconds but it still eventually causes a stall. Trim full up or down seems to make no difference.
I'd check your stick scaling to make sure the '90' slider is all the way up. Btw I'm using the default scale settings.
-
My slider's all the way up, always has been.
All I can tell you is it works for me.
-
I believe it does work for you Toad. I'm suggesting that there is something wrong with your stick/calibration/whatever that's keeping you from getting full elevator deflection. You should be able to pull back enough to cause blackout or stall regardless of how the plane is trimmed.
I suppose it could be my setup that's wrong but there's not much reason for me to change it.
-
Regurge-
I have the same setup, or at least results, that you do. Trim will not give me the effect Toad described, at least not any better than just pulling the stick back a bit more. Sounds to me like he has stick set up for half throw or something like that.
-
Originally posted by Gadfly
AKSwulfe, your memory must be short; every sims FM changes with updates, including this one. That has nothing to do with the "correctness" of the FM, it just means that they were able to refine it further in some way(or fix a boo-boo).
No, actually, this sim hasn't changed it's FM since 1.03. Other planes have been added and then tweaked- but Il2 goes through a major FM revision every patch/upgrade.
-SW
-
SW do you have any idea if FM is tweaked 'cause of whining of players or 'cause they have found some planes do not achieve speeds/ turnrates/climbrates found from charts made by TsAGI or Luftwaffe test center in Rechlin?
I'd like to think it's because of latter :)
-
'cause of whining of players or '
I said that?
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKSWulfe
No, actually, this sim hasn't changed it's FM since 1.03. Other planes have been added and then tweaked- but Il2 goes through a major FM revision every patch/upgrade.
-SW
Not true.
Versions before 2.01 didn't have spin. 2.73 had some control reaction tweak to awoid warp-rolls. 3.0 beta (at least as far as I watched it) had some FM features disabled because HS couldn't understand what Pyro had done in original (pre-Albanian) Warbirds. He never did, otherwise "Albanian" B-24 shouldn't be more maneuverable then 109K over 35,000ft.
BTW, there are rumours that next IL-2 "Shturmovik" patch will be the last one for the original release.
-
AH Boroda, not WB.
-SW
-
I think IL-2 have now the most realistic FM from all Flightsims. Also to play offline and online is more realistic and historic like WB or AH. Before i got IL-2 i fly sometime AH and WB and it is just fun. There got his one Flair of course. If you like it very realistic and historic then IL-2 is the game for that right now offline and online. AH or WB is just for Player there like only Fun , with Icons and automatic Trimmung etc. . AH is AH and IL-2 is IL-2 ; i cant hear that. This are both Flightsims. IL-2 can play also offline.
Also IL-2 is just a Box-Sim :confused: , i can burn AH on a CD and put it in a Box so..... This 2 Games in competition and all Players play his Favorit or both. Also AH-Funplayers can have Fun in IL-2 there is a Option for Icons on or Stalls out etc.....
-
Stalls are modelled in AH.
Il2 can support max of 32 players. It gets pretty rough above 6 players on a 56K.
I can play on AH with 400 players on a 56K.
If Il2 had AH's graphics, not nearly as many people would be singing it's praise... which means you strip off all that pretty eye candy and there ain't gonna be much of a difference between AH and Il2.
and if you think playing with no icons is the definition of "realistic" or "historic" then you must not be a real pilot.
-SW
-
Hi AKSWulfe, i know you are a AH Cheerleader;) but if AH the graphics than this too late, becourse there are coming up a new one from Maddox i think. In AH i see no more than 32 players in my Area, hmm pehrhaps i fly on a wrong direction:) This is not a Argument to have 400 Players you never see them right.
playing with no icons is the definition of "realistic" or "historic"
No this is not a definition, but is a differentiated to AH or WB;)
You think that the fantastic graphics from IL-2 is only the difference to AH? No is not there are a lot more. There are many more Players play IL-2 than AH.
-
Actually I'm not an AH cheerleader, I'm just not dilluted enough to see these "great" differences between AH and Il2.
playing with no icons is the definition of "realistic" or "historic"
Actually, it's your definition. To me, when I'm playing a game on a 15", 17" or 19" monitor on a very scaled down version of the real world with a complete lack of peripheral vision and depth perception, then icons are necessary to simulate what a real world pilot sees. Making it unnecessarily difficult to acquire visuals on something that can be seen much easer in the real world is the defintion of "difficult" not "historic" or "realistic".
Funny thing though, I recieve update positions on those 400 other players. There's a real war going on all over the map, if I want to, I can fly there and fight.
In Il2, I'm limited to a very small area with a limited number of players and a limited number of targets. It's not quite the same thing, if you see what I mean.
You think that the fantastic graphics from IL-2 is only the difference to AH? No is not there are a lot more. There are many more Players play IL-2 than AH.
Without those graphics, no one would be as intrigued in it as they are right now. Simple truth.
You only know that more people bought the game than people play online AH at any one time. Other than that, you are only assuming more people play Il2 than AH. I never see more than 300 people on hyperlobby, and that's fairly rare. I usually see no more than 100 people.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKSWulfe
Actually I'm not an AH cheerleader, I'm just not dilluted enough to see these "great" differences between AH and Il2.
playing with no icons is the definition of "realistic" or "historic"
Actually, it's your definition. To me, when I'm playing a game on a 15", 17" or 19" monitor on a very scaled down version of the real world with a complete lack of peripheral vision and depth perception, then icons are necessary to simulate what a real world pilot sees. Making it unnecessarily difficult to acquire visuals on something that can be seen much easer in the real world is the defintion of "difficult" not "historic" or "realistic".
Funny thing though, I recieve update positions on those 400 other players. There's a real war going on all over the map, if I want to, I can fly there and fight.
In Il2, I'm limited to a very small area with a limited number of players and a limited number of targets. It's not quite the same thing, if you see what I mean.
You think that the fantastic graphics from IL-2 is only the difference to AH? No is not there are a lot more. There are many more Players play IL-2 than AH.
Without those graphics, no one would be as intrigued in it as they are right now. Simple truth.
You only know that more people bought the game than people play online AH at any one time. Other than that, you are only assuming more people play Il2 than AH. I never see more than 300 people on hyperlobby, and that's fairly rare. I usually see no more than 100 people.
-SW
You talk a bit confused now. Have Fun with AH.
-
OSSI: "You talk a bit confused now. Have Fun with AH."
"The judges have cast their votes, AKSeawulfe wins the debate..."
;)
Ossi, what he was saying about numbers is this: We have 300+ online each night of the week, and sometimes 450+ on friday and sat night. This is NOT a boxed game. IL2 is. It never has more the 300 online, and that is rare (of course, all in 32 player limit arenas)
We have several choices of battle fronts to go to within the same arena...there are quite a bit of advantages of AH over IL2, and there are quite a bit of advantages that IL2 has over AH. Defending one sim against another is quite useless...like Toad says...Fly what you like, like what you fly, and don't worry about what the other guy is flying. ;)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
OSSI: "You talk a bit confused now. Have Fun with AH."
"The judges have cast their votes, AKSeawulfe wins the debate..."
;)
Ossi, what he was saying about numbers is this: We have 300+ online each night of the week, and sometimes 450+ on friday and sat night. This is NOT a boxed game. IL2 is. It never has more the 300 online, and that is rare (of course, all in 32 player limit arenas)
We have several choices of battle fronts to go to within the same arena...there are quite a bit of advantages of AH over IL2, and there are quite a bit of advantages that IL2 has over AH. Defending one sim against another is quite useless...like Toad says...Fly what you like, like what you fly, and don't worry about what the other guy is flying. ;)
Yes Ripsnort thats right, but in AH is also a Limit, you cant see all 400 just only on the Map not in the Air right?
In IL-2, Hyperlobby and UBI-Lobby also all Day over 500 Players.
For me is IL-2 better online more historic ect. you know. One Point got AH there is a dynamic War on Ground, but i see this too in IL-2 in the Future :) So to capture Airfield is the only Point to AH JUST FOR ME!;)
-
What's that "icon/no-ican" crap? I own a copy of Il2 and the icons there have much more information than AH icons. Also, thare is a full-blown auto-pilot there, not just auto-trim.
Of course all those options can be disabled - in both sims.
miko
-
Originally posted by miko2d
What's that "icon/no-ican" crap? I own a copy of Il2 and the icons there have much more information than AH icons. Also, thare is a full-blown auto-pilot there, not just auto-trim.
Of course all those options can be disabled - in both sims.
miko
In AH just the Player, but in IL-2 all must have the same Settings.
Autopilot online? NO!
I can make a coop-mission online with 16 Players and 50 AI Bomber or more, cool? The AI Pilots better that some Players in AH :D
-
No autopilot online? I'll never be in IL2 then, how else am I suppose to climb out and take a leak, get a beer? ;)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
No autopilot online? I'll never be in IL2 then, how else am I suppose to climb out and take a leak, get a beer? ;)
:D
-
Originally posted by OSSI
In AH just the Player, but in IL-2 all must have the same Settings.
Not correct - an administrator determines the settings in the arena - including availability of icons, distances at which they appear, how high above ground, ground vehicle icon/dot visibility, sector counters, inflight radar, etc.
A player can disable icons on his PC if arena allows icons, but he can not enable them if arena settings do not permit icons.
So apparently it's a choice of majority of players and/or decision by the HTC that in the Main Arena the icon settings are what we have. In private arenas, scenarios, etc. icon settings are different.
The same is true in Warbirds.
miko