Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: 28sweep on September 23, 2002, 10:31:17 AM
-
some people call it mush. AH seems to have totally ignored it in their flight models? Does it exist? In IL2 you really notice it when trying to set-up for a shot. Those very small osilations make it real anoying trying to line up your shot. WB's has got it. Its nice to be able to make very percise movements in AH-but is that really the case in real life?
-
Is that what they call "mush", hmm
AH planes do seem to be on rails compared to Il2 planes. I dont have any idea which is realistic though.
-
Wings glide on air, they don't rest on air.
I find the artificial directional sway somewhat annoying, and.. well, artificial.
-SW
-
il2s is most related to stick scaling and not as artificial as the control delays in wbs.
It took me some time but my stick is scaled almost like AH.
The one thing that sux about il2 above all others is folks using full flaps and dropping their gear at any speed to cause over shoots.
Its seems this happens more often when ever I fly online.
Complete bs.
-
Yes Wotan, sweet jebus save me from the gameboy tards!
I can't count how many times I see the flaps pop out, and at this point I've already been molestering the hell out of my throttle just to keep behind him due to the poor hitting power of 109's 2xMGs and 1 cannon (usually F2, F4 or G2), so I've practically already got my spinner kissing his tail when I see something come out of the wings..
"what the f..."
And my plane explodes into a fiery mess as I ram him.
So frustrating, did they even program the max speeds flaps could be deployed at in that game?
Sure doesn't seem like it, I've only seen them jam (full down mind you) at 500+ km/h..
-SW
-
Wotan...can you give me some advice on how to scale Il2 like AH?
-
trial an error :)
:)
Seriously I use all ch stuff pedals fighter stick throttle, I tried the cmmanager then scrapped it.
I had to set dead band and filter for pitch and roll.
-
it does take a while to get IL2 setup correctly.. er.. as per AH :)
but it's well worth it.
in fact, it's the only way I can hit anything !
-
What did ya expect guys...Il2 is just a silly game....AH is an air combat simulation.
-
And my plane explodes into a fiery mess as I ram him.
So true I die more from colisions then anything :)
-
Il2 simulates realistic flight better then Aces High does.
Aces high does feel as if planes are riding a predetermined path (Rails) in contrast to Il2 wich is more fluid (as in reality).
Being a real life pilot, although with not with 1000's of hours but a hundred+ as well as having the opportunity to fly in wwii/early 50's fighter trainers, Il2 handles far more aspects of the flight envelope clearer with much more prescison.
The Spins/Stall/Slow flight region for Aces High is somewhat lacking compared to that of Il2. Dont get me wrong Aces High is a good game.. but To refute "Rude".. I think you have it the other way around. Il2 is the more (true simulation) compared to that of Aces High of wich is moreso the (game).
Both programs do a good job in differing aspects, Aces has the obvious networking portion complete with a server based on networking software. Il2 has the graphics quality as well as edge on Flight physics. Both are GOOD programs.
They both fall short of a level D sim or X-plane in the flight modeling department however.
-
Il2 is not more fluid, it just has more artificial oscilations...
that's not fluid, that's the fudge factor.
-SW
-
Originally posted by AKSWulfe
Il2 is not more fluid, it just has more artificial oscilations...
that's not fluid, that's the fudge factor.
-SW
seems like they put less fudge in the russian crates, than the germans
had to I guess or it'd have to had been called BF109 instead of IL2 :)
-
I heard X-Plane was crap.........
-
IL2 calls it flutter
If they call it flutter, they are probably using the wrong term.
Flutter develops from situations like unbalanced flight controls, and can/will completely destroy an aircraft within a couple minutes due to extreme vibration.
Most people who like to get on these boards (and it happened all the time on AGW) and talk about the proper FM or handling of certain aircraft were mostly pompous tards. I would have to bet the overwhelming majority never actually flew one of those warbirds and could honestly, objectively and CORRECTLY state how and aircraft handled. They didnt have a clue, just liked to pretend they did, and my, wasn't that just great for their ego. :)
dago
-
Well, I was being silly, but if you think Il2 resembles RL flight better than AH, then I would disagree.
The comment about being on a rail leads me to ask the following...would any ww2 fighter at 300 indicated tend to feel like it was on a rail or would it perhaps feel like a C-172?
-
would any ww2 fighter at 300 indicated tend to feel like it was on a rail or would it perhaps feel like a C-172?
I would think it would feel like it is a dump truck heading in one direction and resisting a change, requiring heavy stick forces.
Just my guess anyway, I will ask a friend of mine who has flown and logged a fair amount of time in most every type of warbird, and see what he says.
dago
-
Hmm hasn't Oleg admitted the stall/spin model in IL2 is porked?
Andy Bush has commented in the past that fighter aircraft SHOULD feel closer to being on rails...
SKurj
-
Originally posted by jbroey3
Il2 simulates realistic flight better then Aces High does.
Aces high does feel as if planes are riding a predetermined path (Rails) in contrast to Il2 wich is more fluid (as in reality).
Being a real life pilot, although with not with 1000's of hours but a hundred+ as well as having the opportunity to fly in wwii/early 50's fighter trainers, Il2 handles far more aspects of the flight envelope clearer with much more prescison.
The Spins/Stall/Slow flight region for Aces High is somewhat lacking compared to that of Il2. Dont get me wrong Aces High is a good game.. but To refute "Rude".. I think you have it the other way around. Il2 is the more (true simulation) compared to that of Aces High of wich is moreso the (game).
Both programs do a good job in differing aspects, Aces has the obvious networking portion complete with a server based on networking software. Il2 has the graphics quality as well as edge on Flight physics. Both are GOOD programs.
They both fall short of a level D sim or X-plane in the flight modeling department however.
In my squad we have quite a few RL pilots, one of them being a stunt aerobatic pilot and they all pretty much agree that AH, while not perfect, 'feels' right more than any combat 'sim'.
Ack-Ack
-
I dont have any real dramas regarding AH controls.
In IL2, I have a LOT of trouble when attempting precise rudder movements when correcting gun fire. I get a wobbly occilation and I cant get the right feedback via my Thrustmaster Pedals to make the correct adjuctments.
I REALLY need force feedback rudder pedals for accurate rudder control. When I a mbuzzing around the sky, I have pressure on my feet, directly related to airflow over the rudder.
-
errr there both just games.
ah has really good graphics considering its a 38 mb download not a several hundred megabyte "game in a box"
im pretty sure il-2 has bitmap based graphics thus they are better.(as in you can find all the planes in a folder with little bitmap pictures that have every detail.)
they are both the best in there class. il2 being in the game in a box flight sim with a mission based design.
aces high is for the massivly multiplayer people who normally cant stand mission.
il2 has way to many gamey aspects for my taste. i just want to up have a good df and NOT have t oworry if my plane is getting bounced about to much by air turbulence.
-
As Wotan said and Wlfgng concurred, I mention again that the "oscillation" and "wobbliness" in IL-2 is mostly due to problems in stick scaling. IL-2 is the most finickiest game I've ever played when it comes to stick sensitivity - one wrong setting and the whole thing goes cosmo. It took me months to figure out the setting I would use and even now, I check and alter some of the scales from time to time.
Find the correct settings for your stick and you will soon realize the feeling of "flight" in IL-2 is pretty much simular to AH. I'll bet the feeling of flight is more simular between IL-2 and AH, than AH and WB, or AH and AW.
Also, another thing that has to do with this is the trims. The trim effects flight way too much in IL-2.. Whereas it is only a secondary flight control, in IL-2, it's virtually a primary control. If you're trimmed wrong, aiming at a target becomes a nightmare.
At first I was skeptical, but now when I see IL-2, I have to admit the semi-automatic combat trims in AH makes more sense.
-
I don't know about you guys, but I'll take the word of the Spitfire ace who tried AH over guys who fly Cesnnas.
He said that the Spitfire in AH wasn't as precise as the real one. This is precisely the opposite direction of what some of you guys are saying. He was saying that AH was mushier than reality.
Of course, he also saud thet the stick forces were nothing like strong enough. Our joysticks are much too light in the resistance department.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
I don't know about you guys, but I'll take the word of the Spitfire ace who tried AH over guys who fly Cesnnas.
He said that the Spitfire in AH wasn't as precise as the real one. This is precisely the opposite direction of what some of you guys are saying. He was saying that AH was mushier than reality.
Of course, he also saud thet the stick forces were nothing like strong enough. Our joysticks are much too light in the resistance department.
No offense, but this post is asinine. Nobody here is trying to argue that AH is EXACTLY like RL flying. With all due respect to the aforementioned pilot NOTHING will ever precisely reproduce WWII fighter combat except WWII fighter combat and, well, most of us have missed the boat there. We're also assuming this fact as self-evident, but I guess sometimes it needs to be reasserted.
Your haughty attitude doesn't help either.
-
But dude, does it have blade element theory???????????????????????????
-
Ah, Karnak, they won't believe him either.
Everyone knows that RL aircraft jump around so much in flight that you can barely read the instruments.
I mean, how many times have you been cruising at FL290 and had the olive jump clear out of your martini and into the wine glass of the cute chick across the isle, right?
We've all had that experience, even on the smoothest of flying days.
-
Control response in Il-2 is very important and needs a lot of tweaking.
In my experience, curves between linear and quadratic for sliders give the cotrol response very close to the one in AH. For 190, that is. It will fly exactly as in AH, no bouncing whatsoever.
roll sliders - AH 100% all the way, Il-2 linear
pitch - AH linear, Il-2 linear or quadratic
yaw - AH linear, IL-2 linear
linear - 10,20,30,40,50...
quadratic - 1,4,9,16,25...
Still, it is very different from plane to plane and each type requires different slider setup, again, from my experience.
IMO, Il-2 offers many options with which you can tweak the game - from "arcade" to "too hard".
-
I don't like the flight feel of IL2 FM. I have never flown a real plane but somehow the IL2 way doesnt make sense when you consider how unstable and jittery in yaw multiple thousand pound airplanes with small rudders are at very high speeds. My 55inch wingspan 5lb RC plane with a huge rudder is much more stable and tracks much better in rudder manovers, and yes you can tell even if you arent in the cockpit.
-
Yup, I might agree to it. But where is the end then ? WB ? ;)
-
Joystick setting are fonction of your stick and your personnal preferences
I've set my X36 this way in IL2 :
pitch
1X=0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 100 0
roll
1Y=0 25 35 45 55 65 75 85 95 100 100 0
rudder
1RZ=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0
Just to be curious what stick do you have Hristo ?
-
Originally posted by straffo
Just to be curious what stick do you have Hristo ?
Spikemaster F22 Pro (digital upgrade), TQS throttle, Elite rudder.
-
VV a Bodymaster F22 ;)
I've heard it's a quite hard stick to move (like the cougar) .
I need to try one as my X36 is starting to wear out ...
it got lot of troubles but at least it don't want to spike :D
-
Well.... I wouldn't want to disagree with Dago, who just got his multi-engine license ! (congrats boss!!), but....
I flew an 1944 AT-6 Texan, which is probably as close to a WWII fighter most of us will ever get. And probably is fairly representative of early and midwar planes in thrust to weight and most other factors.
And in my opinon, it flew quite crisp. It was very responsive to the controls, and didn't bounce or oscillate in the least. There was no "Mush" and if you centered the controls, the manuever stopped (as in 4 point rolls). In fact it was so responsive that the first time I tried a fast roll, I bounced my head off the side of the cockpit, and I knew it was coming.
The only difference I noticed was that before the instructor trimmed the plane out, it tended to fly with one wing slightly lower due to what is commonly called torque.
But he trimmed the plane once, and didn't touch it again for the flight. Unlike some sims, where you "fly the trim" and have too constantly fiddle with it.
Just my experience.
-
Don't have IL-2 yet but I am going to give it a try this winter when my daily life slows up a bit.
Just one question, are the developers talking about "fixing" the stick scaling routines?
It seems to me that something this critical shouldn't be such a PITA.
I mean if EVERY aircraft has to be scaled differently in order to get it to fly correctly... shouldn't there be an easy reliable process to do so? Or, better yet, no need to scale them individually and an easy way to set up your stick correctly?
Are they talking about this? Because frankly, I'd put this kind of thing in the "game flaw" category.
Thanks.
-
rudder input is imho by far the worst. Theres been no talk of "fixing" it. Trim is so over done in il2 you can actually fly and perform manuvers just using trim.
Theres a huge difference between planes, i dunno if this is do to a difference in fms or scaling between planes.
But would you rather sleep with a good looking stupid blond or a plain ordinary chic with "personality. :)
Thats how I view the ah il2 differences.
-
Just wish they'd make it a bit easier to do the set up part. Playing around endlessly with stick scaling generally starts to make me think there are better uses of my limited computer time.
Well, Wotan.. you know what the old bull said to the young bull. ;) So I'll probably still work them both in at some point.
-
I've been flying with the stick set to 100 across the board since Il2 was released... since they have a crappy joystick setup that will not allow you to select, calibrate, or setup any joysticks that are not on ID0. (or is it ID1?)
So, I have to sit there, open up conf.ini and manually adjust numbers until I think it's right, then re-run Il2.
Toad, you think simply trying to get the right stick scaling is a PITA... you just don't know what I have to go through!
Flying with 100 across the sliders gave me horrid stability control and gunnery was a squeak.
Setting up the numbers so they are closer to what I use in AH, gunnery is easy, but the planes don't appear to manuever as sharply as they did before.
So in the end, you look at the problem as "is gunnery better, or is flying my plane better?"
And on top of all that, it seems as though I can manuever the plane better than anyone else and get tighter manuevers with 100 across the board than I do with anything else...
Of course, I guess it doesn't really matter, since as Wotan said you can manuever your plane with simply trim... and here's a tip: I have a X36 and programmed the thumb rotary to elevator trim...
it actually gives me an advantage when I trim the elevator up when I'm turning in that I can turn faster and stall less!
But it's still a pretty fun game..
-SW
-
It's so difficult to get a clear picture by hearing everyone's descriptions of the feelings of their controls.
In my opinion, there is way too much bounce in AH's controls. I've been in the game for a couple of years now, and I've tried every possible combination of scaling, deadzone, damping. Maybe it's my stick (X36), but I think I should have found something satisfying by now. You guys who claim that AH feels "like it's on rails"... either your description is lacking, or you truly experience different joystick inputs than I've been able to achieve.
Mind you, my experience is limited to Cessnas, but I have to agree with Karnak in listening to the Spit ace.
Now that Hitech has a little time in real aircraft, I'd like to hear his thoughts on the matter.
-
hmmm dux i fly ah with all my sliders at 100% in ah no dead band and have no nose bounce at all.
Ah to me is sharp crisp and responsive.
wb3s isnt just mush there a control delay. You can look at you ailerons and rolll left the return to center and watch as the aileron "slowly returns".
I am no pilot, I am afraid of heights. Of The small planes I flew in one was over the grand canyon, which freaked me out as we approached the canyon over the desert we were nice and level and as we got over the canyon it felt as if the button dropped out for a second. The other time was when I was in the navy and enroute to submarine school. We flew into Groton and landed on a strip that faced some water. The wind must of been blowing as I looked forward we were flying side ways as we approached the runway. Right before we touched down the pilot straightened up and sat us down. Not for me. I cant imagine that an aileron would slowly return given the force of the wind flowing over it.
The advice I got to fly wbs was left aileron, stop then return to center, stop wait for aileron to return, the right aileron stop center stop etc. How can scissors doint that?
Ils is no where near as bad but in my unqualified opinion it seem not to make sense. But I will leave that to the experts.
-
Don't have IL-2 yet but I am going to give it a try this winter when my daily life slows up a bit.
Well Toad, Do you really have anything to say then on the issue?
I dont think so.
Just wish they'd make it a bit easier to do the set up part.
Toad, Again, tell us how hard it was for you to set it up if you have never tried it yet? Im still trying to figure that one out.
Of course, I guess it doesn't really matter, since as Wotan said you can manuever your plane with simply trim...
Well gee how about that. You know that is exactly what happens in reality as well Swulf.
it actually gives me an advantage when I trim the elevator up when I'm turning in that I can turn faster and stall less!
You trim for airspeed Swulf at a specific power setting. A direct byproduct of trim is movement. (the aircraft's trimmed surface is now interacting with the airflow of wich acts on its trimmed surface).
But would you rather sleep with a good looking stupid blond or a plain ordinary chic with "personality
It is funny, Il2 not only has a Higher level of graphic detail but a far more intracate level of personality than that of Aces high.
This is shown through many immersion details that are not present in Aces High.
Tell me what part of Aces High contains the level of detail afforded to each and every individual modeled aircraft that Il2 contains. Oh, not to even mention the ships, tanks and Cities that Il2 has.
Aces High has NO immersion in itself. The people that play it are what creates the illusion. Also tell me what portion of Aces High shows specifics on each and every individual machine of war (tanks/boats/aircraft) that Il2 contains.
Il2 is progressing every single day in many ways. I would even go as far as to say surpassing the level of output that the HTC crew does presently.
Oleg has already stated that he is looking forward to a complete Virtual battle field with player controlled devices. They have already implemented the ability to have MULTIPLE people controlling stations on bombers (To be realeased with Forgotten Battles). The day is going to come when Il2 with its already prevailing detail of weapons of war are going to be player controlled and on a large scale.
Point: When this happens you will not only have all the pluses of Il2's immersion but also an addition of the Human factor.
As this discussion is primarily focused on Stick scaling and ways to achive a simular setup to that of Aces High, I would like to add that I have not ONCE had to alter my scaling for flight.
Using an X-45, elite pedals, and Dhauzimmer's Drivers everything functions excellent.
-
Ewwwwwwwwww... just a bit touchy and defensive there, aren't we?
I guess I can have an opinion about how an aircraft flies in RL, can't I? I do have some experience in that area, including flying numerous WW2 trainer aicraft and riding in several complex ones up to B-25's.
As to commenting on the stick aspect:
I've seen an awful lot of folks posting about the difficulty in getting the stick right in IL-2. You happen to be the very first I've seen that has hasn't had a single problem.
I sat right next to Milo at the con as he attempted to get his stick working and correctly scaled in IL-2. I watched him try to fly and I myself flew it a bit.
First impressions count for a lot, and that first impression left me wondering if it was worth my time at all. I guess I can take a few bugs in the game itself but when the interface is a PITA, I lose interest pretty fast. Which is why I'll wait till the dead of winter when I'm bored witless to wrestle with a problem that's been posted on and highlighted in most of the reports I've read about IL-2. I'm more likely to try to work through the PITA if I have lots of time to work it.
Now that's just my opinon.. one I feel I'm entitled to, btw. I'm sure it gets your neck hairs to stand up, but that's you're problem I think.. not mine.
-
I know how trim works in real life Deezcamp ...
and it is not how Il2 has it modelled... I'll give ya a hint, Il2 does not model trim tabs, but instead the trim actually moves the entire elevator surface.
You can argue it as much as you like, it just ain't right in Il2.
-SW
-
both are games attempting to simulate reality.
have you ever flown/ridden in a small prop powered ftr or stunt plane? The smallest little wind currents tend to buffet the plane.. same with flight controls.. very crisp and responsive but with something neither sim has IMO, minute changes in attitude due to atmosphere. These are tiny aircraft in comparison with today's planes.
The 'fudge' factor in IL2 is just that.. a fudge factor trying to simulate the little changes in attitude.
AH has it right IMO except for the lack of such buffeting.
It seems like the responsiveness is correct but just missing the little bumps and thumps associate with real 'air'.
Until computer games/sims can entirely model all the little nuances associate with RL flight, weather, etc they will be force to apply some kind of substitute.
so it comes down to personal preference... IMO
btw, don't trim tabs in RL help initiate flight surface movement ?
The do on some AC.
-
AKSwulfe,
AH nor IL2 doesn't model Bf109's pitch trim correctly.
Surprisingly WWIIOL does this correctly.. oh the irony :>
Bf109 pitch trim moves the whole horizontal stabilizer.
-
yeah but u black out and die right after you adjust trim :D
-
That is probably the only thing that WW2Ol actually models...
Either way, I wasn't comparing trim between AH and Il2...
Of course, if you are trying to convince me because WW2Ol models the 109 trim properply that it's good, I will just reference you to the incompleteness of the entire game... and the FM specifically.. and how easy mode it is too.
-SW
-
Il-2 has its share of weaknesess, but is surprisingly good sim for being the first made by the development team. Control response routines are probably hard to implement right (how long did it take to HTC team ?). But Il-2 has so many other advantages (IMO) that I am ready to forget these small quirks.
I mean, if I can have all that eye candy, historical matchups, campaigns, and attention to detail which goes to different performance due to weather conditions, ammo mixes, beautiful and functional 3D cockpits - how wouldn't I enjoy the sim ?
Back to the topic. SW said that in Il-2 it is either crisp controls or good gunnery, but not both at the same time. I fully agree, I have been searching for the magical solution for some time and nothing still. Might be a good idea for Il-2 message boards ;).
-
Take a valium jbroey---
Do not question Toads experience in regards to flying real airplanes. He is much to humble to tell you really how much flight experience he has. Just hearing him tell what it is like air to air refueling a RC-135 from a KC-135 and it taking an HOUR on the boom to take a full load of fuel was enough to make me sweat.
In reference to IL-2,,,
I have messed around with it alot the past few months since the con. It is like any GAME, there are things I like and things I dont.
The eye candy is great. I find the tracer flashes way to much.
Inregards to the stick set up- it is very clumsy in my opinion. Both IL-2 and WBs would benifit greatly from taking the AH example of how to do that. I finally got most of the bounce out and have a smooth response to my stick ( USB CH Fighterstick-ProThrottle-ProPeds) but it took way to much time. I have never been able to map the trim to my stick. With both AH and WBs this is very easy. The trim does act a a cheat as is discussed on the UBI boards, you can use the elevator trim to take way to much G. When will people just figure out that trim is just for removing stick pressure,,,, not for manuvering.
I like the ability to just airstart and furball,,and IL-2 has improved my gunnery in AH due to the fact that you have to be more accurate. The flight model is very subjective, we have all seen those arguments on this and other boards. It seems that all the planes hold to much E to me except the 190 which flys like a brick-as it should. I would say that the Russian birds are overmodeled to a point but not that bad. The German planes fly like a thought except I think the 109 rolls a bit to good. The Stuka is a hoot to fly especially when you dive bomb ships. The most fun I have had is the I-16 vrs the PZ-11,,,turn and burn baby.
Other stuff--
I have made this statement before and stick to it,, when it comes to flight references from the good ol USSR you have to remember that they come from a society built on disinformation. No disrespect to Oleg and his crew, they have built a great GAME.
-
And in my opinon, it flew quite crisp. It was very responsive to the controls
I am sure you are correct Vermie, but were you doing 300 at the time? As speed increases, resistance to flight control movement will increase. Thats why I was thinking it was going to be heavier to handle. These planes had neither boosted controls nor did all of them have servo tabs.
dago
-
hristo I think every here enjoys the visual aspects of il2. Most enjoy playing it.
It took me awhile to get my stick where I want it and it works well.
As to wwiiol I like the key mapper their. It seemed a bit much after the simplicity of ahs but I found that you can really tweak your js to fit your style.
My mention of black out in wwwiiol, if you ever enter/ red out black out there you would know what I mean.
The onething that is telling about wwiiols fm is the FA guys telling you how real it is. Not necessarily evidence but it gives me a chuckle.
-
Something I think would be an improvment would be the modeling of wake turbulence. When I do hard 360 turns in my plane I hit my own wake and it is quite a bump. When we get on another AC's 6 we should be buffeted around by his wake quite a bit and that would make direct 6 attacks a bit harder as to aiming. This would make slight off angle attacks a bit more realistic. (think what the wake would be on three B-17's I think you would bounce around a lot.)
Just a thought while we are looking for that last tid-bit of accuracy.
my $0.2 worth
-
Scootter, it's a nice idea... but wouldn't work online due to warping, drop packets, etc...
When we all have fiber optics tho, it'll be a good time.
Hristo, no doubt Il2 was a first good run. I am expecting FB to be better, they seem to have taken a lot of player suggestions in regards to the campaign, interactivity of throttle control (although I do hope they model the 190s throttle system accurately, so that it will finally be better than the 109 in regards to simplicity)..
In any event, I like Il2. It has it's pluses, and it's minuses. I can suspend disbelief in AH tho, so for me to say that about Il2 isn't saying much.. but it is easy to lose yourself in that game... especially some of the online DF rooms and coop missions.
Now, FB... that I think will be quite a bit nicer in offline play.. plus it'll have the Buffalo, P40, Hurri and I153! Not to mention search lights (neato!) I wish they would of added a lesser known German fighter (He112 I think? It's a Heinkel, I know that), but maybe they'll get one in after it's release.
Now if I can just finger out how to get the ultimate joystick scaling, I'll be a happy camper! :)
EDIT: Here's the final version of a 109G2 skin I did: http://www.geocities.com/weissdr1/screenshots.html
-SW
-
jbroey said
"It is funny, Il2 not only has a Higher level of graphic detail but a far more intracate level of personality than that of Aces high.
This is shown through many immersion details that are not present in Aces High. "
well said. I think IL2 makes use of detail of AC and enviroment to make for a game with much more personality then AH has.
clip!
"Il2 is progressing every single day in many ways. I would even go as far as to say surpassing the level of output that the HTC crew does presently."
Also true and exciting. The amount of effort that the IL2 team is putting into growing the game and the way that users can contribute is very impressive. They seem to have fine tuned a way to have models generated "open source" but control the way they are introduced in to the game to ensure a very very high standard and at the same time maintain contol over the game and the comunity.
Olav is also a very very involed designer-developer, you get the small shop felling that HTC has so well but the output is at a rate that no one man can match. they must have at least 4 or 5 very tallented programmers at work there and in effect dozens of artists.
BUT.
its not multi player and even the online game is two bongo lines of 6 ac or so streaming towards each others fields...boring compared to AH. How much of what I like about IL2 would have to be thrown out going to a 250 player arena..
I dont know. But I think if there is money in it..we will find out befor too long.
-
Is jbroey Deezeecamp? Honest question.
Tango, XO
412th FS Braunco Mustangs
-
Yes dtango.
-SW
-
Aw thanks. Some of the replies people have posted make sense now.
Tango, XO
412th FS Braunco Mustangs
-
TOAD.. you're an old RC135 guy ?
me too.. and V models, KC etc.. Eilson AFB
-
Affirm, Wlfgng.
Offutt from '75 to '80. Deployed to the "standards", Kadena, Eielson, Athens & Mildenhall more times than I can count in the RC-135 M, V, U and got to fly the early prototype W's.
Flew Cuba a bunch and Nicaraugua too.
Got to do some cool stuff... like show up the brand spanking new E-3A on its debut at a Nellis exercise. They had live TV feed to the oval office for Carter and we're out there in this old standard V model putting out more intel, more accurate intel and a higher quantity of intel than the new super-duper radar AWAC plane. They made us go home early! (In defense of AWACS, it was their first model and the crews were still really learning it. I'm sure they're excellent at what they do now.)
Lots of great memories.
Good job; it was really an interesting period to be flying Recon... as you probably know. ;)
-
You guys have any recommended books on "recon" :) flights during the Cold War? Always been extremely fascinated with ELINT operations.
Tango, XO
412th FS Braunco Mustangs
-
I have to do the 'mess with conf.ini' to setup my scaling in IL2 and have never achieved the compromise of a plane that feels responsive AND offers decent gunnery..
I've given up messing with it...
for that matter i've given up playin il2 .. oops and AH for the moment..
BF1942 r00lZ :p
SKurj
-
Dago, it was an aerobatic flight (my first) so I honestly didn't spend too much time looking at the airspeed indicator :)
And admittedly the Texan is not a high speed fighter. But I do know we pulled up to 5 G's, and had to dive for some decent speed to build up for some of manuevers. I'm roughly guessing 325 - 350, but that is honestly just a guess.
-
I'm roughly guessing 325 - 350,
I suspect your guessing a little too high, as Vne (never exceed speed) is around 223kts (approx 250 mph) if I remember right. A good friend of mine that I talk with everyday has hundreds of hours in the T-6 and he told me when he took it up to Vne it was very stiff on the controls.
dago
-
Il2 is a boxed game.
AH is a MMOG.
apples to oranges......never understood why Il2 players felt the need to come to this board to cheerlead Il2 and to criticize AH.
Small minded folks do small minded things.
-
Sorry rude..
but I am an AH player.
I think it is just natural to wish for the multi player capablilities of AH in a graphical and atmospheric experiance like IL2.
whats the harm.
Not nowing dick about flight models I think its an interesting discusion about the differences.
-
What I wanna know is.. what happened to that german feller who came here to always tell us how uber-good the Il2 FM would be?
Despite it went through several revisions before it got to what it is today. ;)
(not comparing AH to Il2 either, I'm just saying)
-SW
-
Toad, too bad you couldn't have made it out to fish before the snows came.. prolly woulda' traded plenty of war stories !
great memories of those days and yeah.. those times were damned interesting flying recon.
I remember many sleepless nights when I first started learning all the 'stuff' that really goes on. Over it now and sleep like a baby :)
-
Originally posted by Pongo
Sorry rude..
but I am an AH player.
I think it is just natural to wish for the multi player capablilities of AH in a graphical and atmospheric experiance like IL2.
whats the harm.
Not nowing dick about flight models I think its an interesting discusion about the differences.
You're right Pongo...nothin wrong with yappin about it, but, that's not what happens most times...a pissin match ensues and then my post above becomes relevant:)
-
You see.. told yah I didn't look at the airspeed indicator.
But it doesn't change my point one bit. In the normal flight regime that we flew, the aircraft was light on the controls, responsive, and didn't bounce or osillate at all.