Aces High Bulletin Board
Help and Support Forums => Help and Training => Topic started by: Torvald on November 19, 2002, 08:03:29 AM
-
Well, my confidence as a pilot has deteriorated seriosly over the last few days. I seem to be spending a lot more time as a lawn dart than as an effective air combat warrior and it is begining to make think that this game is not for me.
So, I have come here for help, to find out what I am doing wrong. I should give you a little hardware/sopftware background first. Currently I am using a P3, 866 with 584mb of mem, my grafhics card is a TNT2 with 32 mb. I currnetly use a MS Sidewinder and my keyboard for my flying. I have a MS gamevoice but am having trouble getting it to work. I have been playing flight-sims since Lucasfilms Battlehawks and have always prefered the combat flightsims. AH is the first multi-player flight sim that I have tried. I am also well read in ACM and know all about keeping the energy of the aircraft up to stay alive.
When I have bought it in AH, sometimes its because I have to take my eyes off the monitor to look for certain keys to hit on my keyboard. Others its when my daughter or wife are trying to get my attention and lose track of my altitude or of the other pilot trying to shoot me down. The reason that I die in these situations is because I leave the cockpit, even if for only a split second. There is nothing I can do about my family, but is my setup optimal, do I need to get something other than my current joystick and keyboard? Are trim tabs important in ACM, or is leaving it at combat trim fine?
I haven't found a plane that I really like yet, other than a P-51D and P-51B. Thoough I like the diving capabilities of the P-47.
Oh and I have earned about 300 perk points since I started a week and a half ago. Is this a lot or am I way under the curve?
Any input or help would be greatly apprecitated.
-
you seem to be doing fairly well if you managed 300 perkies already.
nothing you can do about family-ack.
how many buttons on the sidewinder? my SW FFB2 has 7 buttons (8, if u include trigger) and an 8-way hat i use for views, with one button being mapped as a set-shifter, giving me an extra 8 views (i leave all other functions the same in set 2). it's a twisty stick, plus it has a throttle slider on the base.
that leaves me 6 mappable buttons. 3 on the top/back of j/s and 3 (4th is 2nd set toggle) on the base.
the top 3 buttons are, gunsight zoom toggle and raise/lower flaps.
the 3 base buttons are, clipboard, select secondary weapon (or cycling thru ord) and view detail f3 toggle (i fly in high detail mode while cruising and then go into close in detail (shift-f3) when engaged - due to having a lower end machine and fps issues).
i moved a several other functions (remapped keyboard) over to the number pad... / is dive flaps (for those planes that can use them) * and - are for rpm control + is for wep is for check 6 . (del) is for damage report.
reason i moved them over is because they're the most commonly used by me under combat situations and my keyboard is to the left of my joystick, so i simply use my left hand to hit those numpad keys for whatever i need. i left the actual numpad views 0-9 as they are, but i imagine they could be remapped as well.
as for a plane of choice, there are 2 ways to go about it.
first is to fly 'em all (or the ones that interest you the most) then settle down to learning 1 or 2 real well before adapting to other planes later on.
second is to pick 1 or 2 planes and learn them (and the AH fm/gunnery) real well and then start flying 'em all.
in any case at some point you want a little stick time in every plane if only to at least get an idea of their performance so you know to to defeat them.
just stick at it and things will fall into place and before you know it, you'll be a rook (if not already one) and tearing up lemmings left and right.
:D
-
300 perks in a week and a half?
didn't have perks when I started but it was a good 2 weeks before I hit anything, let alone shot it down
your fine, keep practing - avoid the furballs to die less - go where the numbers are in your favor
gl
-
I use a old version of Microsoft Precision Pro 1. It's got 4 buttons on the left side, slider throttle, one large button in the middle, two triggers and 1 hat, two small thumb switches next to thumb trigger button.
I mapped my flaps, WEP and Zoom key on the left four buttons, mapped "look up" to the large middle button("shift" button as some may call it..), two trigger buttons are for machine guns and cannons, and hat is for looking, and transmission keys to the small thumb buttons.
With this config, all I ever need with the key board is "G" gears and "E" for engine. AH view system is excellent, and I can look freely with my hands on the throttle and stick. Only rare, occasional keys are needed to use something like dive flaps or landing hooks.
-
Torvald:
By the looks of it you are doing just fine! There is a pretty steep learning curve. To keep things in perspective there is a heck of a lot to learn regarding air-to-air combat. It's not good enough just to know theory however and there's a learning curve involved in learning to apply the knowledge correctly. Getting used to the flight models from sim to sim is another factor which is significant. You are also flying against some of the best sim pilots out there who have been doing this for a long long time.
Here are two good articles on trim:
http://www.netaces.org/ahtraining/lephturn/trim.html
http://www.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/air_combat/trim/
I find that using trim is a finer point of BFM. Personally I don't worry about trim during engaged maneuvering and leave combat-trim on in AH.
Both those websites by the way are good sources of information to browse and digest.
There are other fundamental topics to work on in my opinion. Here is a short but not a comprehensive list in no particular order:
1. Situational Awareness
2. Gunnery
3. Characteristics of a/c (check out Soda's page: http://www.telusplanet.net/~dsoder/models)
4. Angles Tactics
5. Energy Tactics
Again simhq and netaces are good places to go and browse information.
Tango, XO
412th FS Braunco Mustangs
-
Torvald, I started about a month ago and share alot of your frustrations. I've read all the web pages and though I appreciate the effort they put into them for the most part i've found them near worthless. They all contain the same language like "gain angles" and "maintain E" but tell you nothing about how to do it. They tell you to bleed energy from your opponent by making him turn and then tell you how you do that is by turning yourself. Doesn't make much sense when you think about it. Anyway i've recently begun making some progress and have found my biggest problem wasn't ACM but that I simply lost track of my opponent. In every case recently where i've lost a 1vs1 it's been because during various evasions and maneuvers i'd lost sight of my opponent and/or which direction they were heading. One thing that helped me solve this is upgrading my video card.
I have almost your identical PC setup. First I can tell you an upgrade will help. I ordered a GEForce4 4600 and a new 2.6Mhz comp to replace it but have only recieved the vid card so far so I stuck that in my old PC to see if it would help. It does. With the new resolution I can actually see which direction my opponent is heading while engaged. I can see flak and ground targets much easier too.
I still have problems during sissors type fighting where eventually the bog gets above or below me and hence out of sight. Shanes post is helpful about mapping your joystick to keys. I think I have the same joystick as him except my four left buttons aren't being recognized by AH. If they would work I could more views (top views especially) and flaps which would help immensley.
Another thing i've found from my experience that seems contrary to common advice is plane selection. All the advice I was getting before was that I should learn ACM is a turning plane like a NIK or spit. I tried that and I was continually getting shot down before getting a chance to learn a thing. Instead i've been driving an LA7 and have been having much better luck. In this plane you can still try turn/sissor fighting with other fast planes (la7's, 51's, tiffies, etc) and at least last long enough to learn what you're doing wrong and then against the slower planes you can learn BnZ stuff and still have enough speed to get away when you screw up.
Good luck and hang in there.
-
Originally posted by Mooja
Torvald, I started about a month ago and share alot of your frustrations. I've read all the web pages and though I appreciate the effort they put into them for the most part i've found them near worthless. They all contain the same language like "gain angles" and "maintain E" but tell you nothing about how to do it. They tell you to bleed energy from your opponent by making him turn and then tell you how you do that is by turning yourself. Doesn't make much sense when you think about it.
Grab a copy of Fighter Combat, by Robert Shaw. It DOES explain a lot of how to do it. At http://www.bookfinder.com you can find cheap used copies.
For the most part ACM maneuvers are common sense, simply what you want to do in a certain situation, but doing them in an ideal manner isn't. The diagrams and explanations give you an idea of what to look for. It's hard to understand a scissors fight, without actually flying it, but once that does happen, it becomes clear what's going on.
As for forcing your opponent to bleed energy, it makes a lot of sense. You make a slow sustained high-speed turn, while your opponent pulls maximum G's, slowing way down. Doing this for a few turns, your opponent will gain angles(or come around on you) and kill you. But thats where your trump card is. While he IS behind you now, you're going a lot faster. Pull up slowly into the vertical, he follows you, he stalls before you, you reverse and blast him while he is trying to recover control.
It's the textbook e-fight.
For more information on the basics of acm check out http://www.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/air_combat/f3manual/bfm1.shtml
Also, ACM is not all that important in the MA where it's more important to make your plane look like a hard kill, and to go after the easy kills. But when you end up 1 on 1 against someone, it will make all the difference.
-
Originally posted by Innominate
Grab a copy of Fighter Combat, by Robert Shaw. It DOES explain a lot of how to do it. At http://www.bookfinder.com you can find cheap used copies.
Or try John Boyd's Aerial Attack Study, if you can find it that is. If Shaw's book is the fighter pilot's bible, Boyd's book is the Holy Grail and extremely hard to find.
Ack-Ack
-
Thanks for the book suggestion. I'll have to check that out.
Originally posted by Innominate
...snip..
As for forcing your opponent to bleed energy, it makes a lot of sense. You make a slow sustained high-speed turn, while your opponent pulls maximum G's, slowing way down. Doing this for a few turns, your opponent will gain angles(or come around on you) and kill you. But thats where your trump card is. While he IS behind you now, you're going a lot faster. Pull up slowly into the vertical, he follows you, he stalls before you, you reverse and blast him while he is trying to recover control.
...snip...
This is the part I don't understand. You're turning, he's turning... you're both turning. If he's turning to follow your turn how is it possible he has to pull more G's to do that assuming equilivant plane types. This is the kind of stuff I read over and over but I have found no use for it in practice. I'm sure i'm missing something.
From what i've found in order to go vertical in front of someone to force them to stall you have to have *alot* more momentum than they do because 1) It's certain they're going to be shooting at you as you go up. 2) The reverse has to be a loop or yo-yo of some sort otherwise they'll be recovered before you reverse. So you have to have enough momentum to be able to start your loop/yo-yo at the height at which your opponent has already stalled. 3) If you stall *just* after they stall then you're both trying to recover only he's still pointing at you while you're still trying to turn around.
I don't think i've ever been in a position where i've had that much momentum and still worried about a slow guy on my 6.
-
SA is crucial to success. Learning to judge relative E states is crucial to SA. That will only come with practice, but it is something that you should be constantly aware of. Knowing how the other guy's E state (and plane type) compares to yours, tells you a lot about your options -- and his.
-
popeye, i've read that exact same thing many times now. It still means nothing to me and I have a feeling it applies more to R/L than it does to Aces High. Warping and lags make that kind of judgement spotty at best and many times is more of a distraction than anything else.
As i've been reading more and more in the ACM arena I find that it's filled with statements that you've just posted. No offense to you popeye and I understand and appreciate that you're offering help but you've written a whole paragraph and managed to tell me nothing about what to do in order to not get shot down. This kind of communication is so prevalient in the literature I come across in this genre that it baffles me. I've come to the conclusion that this sort of generic articulation stems from the military origins of ACM. Pick up any military book and you'll find the same things. Alot of words with special jargon and connotations but no useful information.
Take for example the term "E-state". I understand this is short for energy state. This means so many things that the term is essentially useless when using it in a sentence. For instance there is enough energy contained in the mass of one C47 to blow apart the entire Earth if you apply Einsteins equations to it. This information helps me zero when determining which way to turn when a spit IX is on my 6.
I think it just boils down to the fact that you have to get out there and fly around while staying alive long enough to learn something. There's only so much you can get from reading.
-
Originally posted by Mooja
Thanks for the book suggestion. I'll have to check that out.
This is the part I don't understand. You're turning, he's turning... you're both turning. If he's turning to follow your turn how is it possible he has to pull more G's to do that assuming equilivant plane types. This is the kind of stuff I read over and over but I have found no use for it in practice. I'm sure i'm missing something.
...
3) If you stall *just* after they stall then you're both trying to recover only he's still pointing at you while you're still trying to turn around.
I don't think i've ever been in a position where i've had that much momentum and still worried about a slow guy on my 6.
He doesnt HAVE to pull more G's, in fact, he can pull less in an attempt to get you to slow down. But in the MA, virtually all pilots will go for a maximum g turn. If both planes are coming in at equal speeds, and pulling the same number of g's you'll just go in circles, and nobody will gain any kind of position. In the above, you sacrifice your neutral position for extra speed, while your opponent converts some of his energy into angles.
As for going up, it depends entirely on the planes involved. Some of them(like the n1k2 for instance, or the spit) are extremely dangerous much of the time, without a big advantage, since they'll hover and spray.
As for stalling out, that is probably the best wayt to turn around when roping someone. Learning to control the plane as it stalls, and bring the nose down quickly onto the target takes some practice, but is much faster than trying to loop.
-
Originally posted by Mooja
I think I have the same joystick as him except my four left buttons aren't being recognized by AH. If they would work I could more views (top views especially) and flaps which would help immensley.
try reinstalling DX, after you do, all teh buttons shoul dbe recognized. sometimes i'd remove my calibration info and reinstall the stick, or d/l a patch for AH and then my buttons wouldn't get recognized - buttons 7 and 8... and teh stick would be recognized as a precison pro, not forcefeedback.
reinstalling dx solved that problem everytime.
also double check the sw mapping proggie and make sure those 4 buttons haven't been set up as something else. i only use the sw software for the ffb return to center tension and ffb effects. all the stick mapping is done via the AH stickmapping.
-
Originally posted by Mooja
Thanks for the book suggestion. I'll have to check that out.
This is the part I don't understand. You're turning, he's turning... you're both turning. If he's turning to follow your turn how is it possible he has to pull more G's to do that assuming equilivant plane types. This is the kind of stuff I read over and over but I have found no use for it in practice. I'm sure i'm missing something.
The idea is that he is pulling more G (i.e. turning harder) than you. This happening because you are deliberately not turning as hard as he is: i.e. you are letting him gain an angular advantage at the expense of his energy while you use best sustained turning speed. If you are doing it right you should see the bogey stop (or at least slow a lot) gaining angles as his air speed bleeds off below corner velocity (while you should not be slowing as much becuase you are conserving energy). At that stage you pull into a vertical manuever and initiate a rolling scissors (series of loops essentially) where your energy advantage should give you a good shot possibility. Obvioulsy this a difficult set of tactics to judge accurately (i.e. if you bleed too mcuh speed or the bogey is faster than you think or conserves energy then you end up with a bogey locked on your six). It may well provide the bogey with snap shot opportunites when you reverse your turns even if you are doing it right so you may still have to jink a bit at the reverse. This hole set of tactics is based on the fact that if you show a bit of your six to a guy even an experienced stick will find it hard to resist the temptation to yank the nose round as hard as possible to grab the offered angles advantage.
(Note that all I'm doing here is paraphrasing Shaw's book which goes into a more detail and explains it better).
Energy fighting in this manner is more difficult to understand and do correctly than angles fighting so you probably want to stick to angles tactics and pure zoom & boom until you get a good handle on your aircraft and judging a bogeys energy.
With regards to all the notes, website and books I can say that they are worth reading even from the start but it will take you a while to appreciate the situations they are really talking about and get a feel for the manuevers involved. Watching other guys filsm can accelerate this process.
-
Originally posted by Mooja
Take for example the term "E-state". I understand this is short for energy state. This means so many things that the term is essentially useless when using it in a sentence. For instance there is enough energy contained in the mass of one C47 to blow apart the entire Earth if you apply Einsteins equations to it. This information helps me zero when determining which way to turn when a spit IX is on my 6.
A plane in flight has two types of energy, kinetic(it's speed) and potential(it's altitude). You can convert speed into altitude by climbing, altitude into speed by diving. Energy state is the combonation of a plane's speed and altitude.
A co-alt plane going faster than you has more energy. A plane higher but going the same speed as you has more energy. Two planes at the same speed and altitude can be said to be co-energy(or co-e).
-
The E state of a plane in AH is a combination of the speed and altitude (and weight) of the plane. You can judge the other guy's speed by the rate of change of the icon range indicator. If you are slow and the range is changing rapidly, he is fast...etc. His relative altitude is obvious. His plane type tells you how well it will retain E in a turn or zoom, and how well it will climb, dive, roll, accelerate, run, see, and turn, and how dangerous his guns are.
Knowing the other guy's plane type and E state tells you his options, and yours. Of course, if he turns out to be Drex....you may not have any options. :)
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Or try John Boyd's Aerial Attack Study, if you can find it that is. If Shaw's book is the fighter pilot's bible, Boyd's book is the Holy Grail and extremely hard to find.
Ack-Ack
Any idea where one might be able to find it?
-
But you can measure the energy in a plane in many more ways than ways than just kinetic and potential. There's rotational energy, probably some magnetic energy... heat, chemical, mechanical, ...etc. It seems what we're really talking about here is momentum and it's common sense that a falling object (discounting other forces) will gain momentum and a rising object will lose momentum. A child knows this. So why all this business about E-states which is at best an ambiguous term. I think this is why I never went into the military. Take a simple concept like a falling rock and assign an unnecessary term to it in order to add ambiguity and complexity. Bah!.
BTW, one thing I have noticed in the AH community is that in general the class of people here is above par compared to other MMOLG's. I've played a few others and I can say without a doubt that the people here are definitely more patient and constructive when it comes to helping out others. Thanks for all the help fellas.
-
Originally posted by Mooja
But you can measure the energy in a plane in many more ways than ways than just kinetic and potential. There's rotational energy, probably some magnetic energy... heat, chemical, mechanical, ...etc.
BTW, one thing I have noticed in the AH community is that in general the class of people here is above par compared to other MMOLG's. I've played a few others and I can say without a doubt that the people here are definitely more patient and constructive when it comes to helping out others. Thanks for all the help fellas.
There are different types of energy yes, but it's all irrelavent. Speed and altitude are the most relavent by far. The heat contained in your plane isn't going to get you away from that spitfire. :P
As for the community, I suspect a lot of it has to do with the average age, which in AH is sickeningly high. The average age in a game can determine quite well the attitude of the game's community.
-
Mooja:
Innominate is right. The only relevant energy in these air combat discussions are kinetic and potential.
Physics Stuff
=========
Momentum and energy are not the same thing. You can see it in the mathematical relationships:
*Momentum = mass x velocity
*Force = mass x acceleration = rate of change of momentum
*Work = force x distance
Energy is the ability to do work (abilty to move an object some distance):
*Kinetic Energy = 1/2 mass x velocity^2
*Potential Energy = weight x height
Simply put momentum is a measure of inertia of a mass while energy is a measure of the ability for a force to move an object.
That's my simplistic way of explaining it. Perhaps some other folks versed in physics can explain it better. The confusing part is that both are velocity dependent in the case of momentum and kinetic energy.
So when we speak of maneuvering an aircraft we refer to the measure of ability to use force to move the aircraft (energy) - and not the inertia of the mass of the aircraft(momentum).
And yes I realize none of this tells you anything about applying the concept of energy in air combat :). It's too late right now to explain anymore (I need to go to bed!). Perhaps another fine pilot in the AH community can help you make the linkage between the academics of energy to the application of the energy concept.
Tango, XO
412th FS Braunco Mustangs
-
Originally posted by dtango
Mooja:
Physics Stuff
=========
Momentum and energy are not the same thing. You can see it in the mathematical relationships:
*Momentum = mass x velocity
*Force = mass x acceleration = rate of change of momentum
*Work = force x distance
Energy is the ability to do work (abilty to move an object some distance):
*Kinetic Energy = 1/2 mass x velocity^2
*Potential Energy = weight x height
Simply put momentum is a measure of inertia of a mass while energy is a measure of the ability for a force to move an object.
That's my simplistic way of explaining it. Perhaps some other folks versed in physics can explain it better. The confusing part is that both are velocity dependent in the case of momentum and kinetic energy.
So when we speak of maneuvering an aircraft we refer to the measure of ability to use force to move the aircraft (energy) - and not the inertia of the mass of the aircraft(momentum).
And yes I realize none of this tells you anything about applying the concept of energy in air combat :). It's too late right now to explain anymore (I need to go to bed!). Perhaps another fine pilot in the AH community can help you make the linkage between the academics of energy to the application of the energy concept.
Tango, XO
412th FS Braunco Mustangs
brain hurt!! pull stick and shoot stuff!!
:D
-
simple rules;
work the edges of a furball... know where other planes are..
stay high and fast...
don't turn fight with a spit etc.
Joystick recomendation is x45...best bang for buck.....
-
I understand the physics involved. I don't understand the nomenclature. My point was that the term "energy state" is ambiguous & misleading. As are the terms "gain angles", "merge" as well as many other terms commonly used in this community.
For instance take the term "pull into him". This is a widely used term taken to mean that you should turn in a direction with the intention of heading towards your opponent. The term "pull" is used because in most cases you "pull" back on the flight stick to initiate a turn. However if the opponent is slightly below and in front of you you would actually "push into him" to accomplish your goal. Have you ever heard someone say they pushed into their opponent? These are the things that don't make sense. If you were to try to teach someone to drive a car or program a computer or do anything else outside of the military with the same kind of communication lapses that are used in ACM you would very quickly be deemed inconsequential and subsequently ignored.
Anyway, last night I was in a La7 and got outrun by a Temp, a P51, and some kind of 190 in three back to back sorties. That's just not right either. ;)
-
Originally posted by Mooja
I understand the physics involved. I don't understand the nomenclature. My point was that the term "energy state" is ambiguous & misleading. As are the terms "gain angles", "merge" as well as many other terms commonly used in this community.
However if the opponent is slightly below and in front of you you would actually "push into him" to accomplish your goal.
Anyway, last night I was in a La7 and got outrun by a Temp, a P51, and some kind of 190 in three back to back sorties. That's just not right either. ;)
The nomenclature is specific to air combat. Take a look at the falcon 3.0 manual link, as it explains a lot. Energy state is very specific, and means nothing more than your speed and altitude in this context. Not knowing what the terms mean doesnt make them the slighest bit ambiguous.
"Gain angles" means essentially to get your nose closer to a firing position.(Read the link below for more idetails)
The "merge" is the opening move in a fight, where two planes going in different directions merge into each other.
You would almost NEVER want to "push" into somene. A plane's wing is designed to lift upwards, not push down. To turn towards someone below your lift vector, it's almost always(except for small adjustments) better to roll your lift vector onto him, and then pull back on the stick
http://www.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/air_combat/f3manual/bfm1.shtml
As for the la7, it may be fast, but a plane with an altitude advantage can easily dive and catch it. A tempest can catch an la7 in level flight.
-
Saying the energy state of a flying plane is restricted to its kinetic and potential energy is like saying all humans have one arm (and implicitly assume the listener knows you have to cut off the other arm to arrive at that fact). The words "energy" and "state" have explicit meanings in the english language and when used together they mean more than kinetic and potential energy. The ACM community has chosen to redefine their meaning for their specific purpose and could've done just as well to call "energy state" "gobbly gook" instead because neither one involves kinetic and potential energy alone.
Also if we're turning in a circle then anytime you're gaining angles you must also be losing angles from somewhere else. Why isn't it called losing angles then? Ambiguity.
This topic reminds me of how California wanted to start teaching ebonics in schools a few years back. That way kids would know that juice wasn't something you drank but instead it was some quantity of money. And fly meant you were popular, a dime is an attractive young woman with questionable morals ...etc.
-
Mooja,
Do you complain that people having garage sales won't sell thier garages?
-
Mooja,
Air combat and aeronautics have their own jargon, just as computers, automobiles, and nearly everything else does. People are trying to help you by explaining the jargon, and how it relates to AH.
-
Yeah, why is that about garage sales too?
All I know if I walked into military flight school expecting to learn things about how to not get killed and instead all I got was a modified ebonics lesson i'd very quickly begin re-assessing my survival options. You'd think they'd want to be a little more professional about such things. I guess it must work though cause here we are. Like they say, dance with the one that brung ya. 8)
-
Mooja, is english your first language? If not, then I can understand. If it is I'm going to assume you're just trolling, and don't actually want help.
-
Well my initial post was meant to try to help the thread originator by relating my own experiences and frustrations and how I dealt with them being new to this myself. Part of that frustration (which I think i've overcome but still baffles me why it's necessary) was the English-to-English translations that are required when attempting to glean any information out of the various literature available on the topic. From there it just seemed to blossom somehow. Now I fear it looks like it's beginning to become a pure and simple hijack and perhaps we should maybe get back on topic.
-
Mooja, your lack of understanding the need for the terms, seems to indicate a lack of understanding of what they mean.
Have you read the link I posted?
How else would you refer to a planes energy state? Jargon exists for a reason, to make a more complex idea easier to communicate with.
-
You've got 300 perk points already?! I haven't managed that in over a year!
Mayhap you have far more exacting standards than I. AH will meet them and more. It seems to me that a player of your skill is being held back by your equipment. If you need to use the keyboard unnecessarily, you haven't got enough buttons on your HOTAS. Get yourself a Saitek X45 or Thrustmaster Afterburner or Thrustmaster Cougar depending upon budget. And get yourself a set of rudder pedals.
Shaw's Fighter Combat is a must too. I'm told he plays here, though we've never crossed, but there are other real pilots, both civilian and military here.
Further, do be aware of the strategy element of AH.
-
I'd read all three links you posted by about the fouth day of downloading the game. (about a month ago) I have not yet read the books that were suggested and am working on that part.
Looking back I think it would have been clearer for myself to understand if ACM were to refer to what they call "e-state" and "energy" using momentum style references and acceleration due to gravity. Most every Joe understands how speed, weight and gravity affect each other.
Calculating the energy state of a plane (the real energy not some ACM defined subset) would have little value. If you were to go into a physics lab and begin lecturing about energy states but ignore all energy except potential and kinetic energy you'd be laughed out of the room. Or if you went into a trigonometry class, drew a triangle on the black board and said "Here we're gaining an angle" you'd have some puzzled looking students. When people misrepresent the meaning of technical terms like they do in ACM it gives the impression that they don't know wtf they're talking about to begin with. Like I said, this would not inspire me with confidence if my arnold were really on the line.
-
Mooja, you don't have a clue what you're talking about.
-
Hum, I guess that proves it then.
-
Mooja, Innomin8 is right, you don't have a clue. Read some of the links above and try to learn something...
-
good god , Mooja has started another "you can't have 120% fuel because you can only have 100% of anything"
Mooja, the key to happy life is to simplify , not to complacate
-
Mooja, I know what you mean. I don't know all the fancy terms for stuff either. It really isnt important.
Two things you really need to know about "ACM"
1. The slower plane will almost always win in a nose to nose turn (because the faster plane will fly out in front).
2. See 1.
Everything else you can just make up. Honest.
It works for me (after a fashion anyway).
You can apply 1 to just about any situation. Vertical? If you are both going up, it is a nose to nose turn in the vertical plane. If both planes are pulling for a shot, the slower one will get there first. Horizontal (or flat) turn? Both planes pulling for a shot, the slower one will get one first. Someone overshoots, then tries to turn hard for a shot on you? Pull back into them, since they overshot they are obviously going faster, and if you don't know which plane wins a nose to nose fight by now, I give up :).
-
Originally posted by Innominate
Any idea where one might be able to find it?
The only place I've been able to find it at is the Air University library at Maxwell AFB, Alabama. Trying to get it through an interlibrary loan with my local library.
Ack-Ack
-
Originally posted by Mooja
For instance take the term "pull into him". This is a widely used term taken to mean that you should turn in a direction with the intention of heading towards your opponent. The term "pull" is used because in most cases you "pull" back on the flight stick to initiate a turn. However if the opponent is slightly below and in front of you you would actually "push into him" to accomplish your goal. Have you ever heard someone say they pushed into their opponent? These are the things that don't make sense. If you were to try to teach someone to drive a car or program a computer or do anything else outside of the military with the same kind of communication lapses that are used in ACM you would very quickly be deemed inconsequential and subsequently ignored.
I think your problem is you take things way to literal. When you "pull" into someone, it's a reference to pulling into his turn.
Ack-Ack
-
It'll get better :), just takes practice.
Use the TA (training arena). There are a lot of good pilots that donate time there, and will be happy to show you the ropes.
Read up on how each plane flies. (The following is a link I found very helpful. http://www.telusplanet.net/~dsoder/models.htm .). In-other-words, what does it do well and what does it do poorly. i.e.: climbs to alt fast or turns well, has a lot of ammo or a little... Things like that can help you understand and anticipate what your opponent is most likely going to do. If you know what the attack plan is ahead of time, you have a better chance of beating the opponent.
Now this is somewhat overly simplified, but it will let you understand the basics, then the finer points will come with experience.
Also, mapping keys to your stick that you use frequently is a great help. But even if you don't, you'll get to know where they are with time. :)
I hope this helps, and I will try to post a link to the page I mentioned above.
JestrCAF
-
Originally posted by JestrCAF
It'll get better :), just takes practice.
JestrCAF
yep, doing everythinig twice is one way to learn. :D
-
As for the "he turns, I turn" bit:
Bounce an enemy from above, and heÄll likely pull a split-s or a break turn. Don't even try to follow him - climb, and let him waste his speed and/or alt turning. At the top of the climb, reverse on him and repeat.
He'll be slow & low after some passes. Then, nail him.
-
Split S = roll inverted and pull stick back.
Break turn = roll to one side (direction of intended turn) and pull stick back.
Split S uses vertical plane, break turn uses horizontal.
Both of these manouvers are defensive, and remove more options from you than they will give.
Think of 'Energy' as 'Options'
Options = LIFE
Limited options makes you predictable, being predictable makes you easy to shoot. (ie....someone flying 100ft up, at 200 mph is pretty much dead if you are behind them, they dont have the option to use the airspace below them, you KNOW they arent going to dive away, and at 200 mph, he isnt going to climb a hell of a lot either, so that pretty much leaves him with the options of a] turn left
b] turn right.
Now, think about the possible moves an enemy might make if he is at 15000 ft, and 320 mph.......he can go up, down, left, right or any combination of those......much more options, much less likely that you will accurately predict what he is going to do, much less likely that you will be able to shoot him.
To GAIN options, climb or accellerate.
Climbing gives you the option to use the airspace below you, accellerating gives you the option to climb.
Situational Awareness (SA) is paramount, you simply CANNOT fight someone if you dont know where they are and what they are doing........Lose Sight, Lose The Fight.
:) Just thought that might help.
Ntice how a whole descriptive sentence can be condensed by use of jargon BTW.
Blue
-
its not a "split S" its a "Split Esse" :)