Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Ike 2K# on April 06, 2003, 11:17:54 PM
-
does Warbirds III have realistic plane characteristics like AH?
-
It depends what you mean by characteristics..
If you mean flight model, WB is way off. The mushy roll rate is a 'feature' only seen in WB and not in any other flight sim on this planet. Therefore I doubt it's modeled correctly.
It has slightly better graphics, but that's not reason enough to play it.
-
played it offline a bit...feels a lot like AH but has a few bugs in the FM.
-
If WB still had the amount of people online that it did when it was WB 2.xx I would still be playing it. That is if the WBIII had some STrat objects. Like WB 2.xx did that is.
Kinda like the Axis vs Allied thingy they had going. The RPS also.
CT here in AH is lacking the Plane set it needs to be playable IMHO. or else i would probably be in there more often.
WBIII's Graphics are better than AH's for sure all except the terrain. explosion and plane damage model is close to what AH has except it looks a lot better Than AH since AH hasn't done much with they're Graphics. Hopefully AH2 will change all that.
Certain Plane FM's are different but not much different than AH.
It was easy to get used to AH coming from WB. All except the gunnery. In WB the bullets seemt to drop quicker than the do in AH. It took me awhile to get used to that. I was alway overshooting in AH because of that. It's Starting to get better my shooting that is in AH. Except when I been playing IL2 FB a lot that is.
-
hmm, realistic or different ?
the FM's are different most certainly, WB 2.77 is closest to AH in my opinion, 2.77 and WB III are different (again IMO).
There is a certain mushyness (is that a word ?) in WB III, but ...... I am led to believe that adjusting your stick scalings does a lot to reduce or even get rid of this effect.
I played WB 2 for many years, the only reason I changed to AH was for the numbers, I still keep an account in WB for events etc which are well run and enjoyable (so are the AH ones)
It's a personal thing I guess ........
wipass
-
Wipass no amount of stick scaling gets rid of the artificial control delay. Turning in WB is like bouncing a stone at the end of a rubber band.
That means that inertia of the movement overcomes the control inputs - or - control movements are extremely slow so that it takes a ridiculously long time to adjust maximum-to-minimum controls which creates a response delay especially if the controls have been deflected heavily.
In effect, if you want to roll a bit and stop the movement in WB you roll, then 1 second before you want the movement to stop you counter-roll. In Ah you roll and center and the plane responds immediately. Keeping in mind the control surfaces are effective all the time (stall not included) AH's modeling sounds more accurate. IL-2 forgotten battles models roll similarly to AH too, even though in IL much more factors are taken into account.
In IL-2 you can feel the gyro forces from the prop and recoil from guns etc. stuff as where AH planes fly in direct line.
-
FM its close to 2.77, like my friend say "WB3 FM is wb277 pro:)
Its not unrealistic, only a bit diferent.
We try WB last month, as smth diferent for fun.
I really like smoke tracers and explosions from WB3.
But over all i dont like WB3 graphics system, everything looks blured.
Its game from high addcicted like AH, but less user friendly, imho.
ramzey
-
my opinion is you are flying in jello over there with guns that are mounted 100 feet out from your wingtips and cant hit crap with them except at convergance, their ju-88 is horribly modelled looks ugly, Otto so buffers can get kills while they take their bubble baths. The fact that when I played it for a few months they only had 109f but of course had spit9, no p47(at that time) and yet added a friggen F-86. Mind you havent tried it since Nov. 2001 though so it might be different now.
-
AH has a lot more noobs to kill and noone really complains when you're vulching.
-
IMHO WB3 FM is so poorly done it makes me wonder exactly what market they are trying to sell to.
I tried doing some testing offline with the latest version of WB3 a couple weeks ago.
1. Top speeds are not even in the ballpark. In fact they are not even in the same sport from what I can tell. I think they got their numbers from a CrackerJack box. Not from any Docs I have ever seen.
2. Roll rates are hampered by unbelievable roll inertia which makes it feel like underwater warbirds.
3. E-retention is non existant.
4. The 6 view modeling is a joke. Even if the view system was accurate (and it isn't) it makes you turn your head at about 5 degrees per second. Basically if someone is on your 6 by the time you can manipulate your views, if you can see them, then maybe your flight controls will work so you can begin to dogfight. They just need to make the bullets in slow motion to match the rest of the game.
The one positive thing in WB3 is the offline interface with some AI for offline practice. I would like to see it here but hardly worth crying about.
-
but I did not make it. I just barely went over the one week mark and after getting berated by "WLDBL" about "join a squadron its more fun that way" and him talking about how he likedthe FE of AH but the small download and gameplay were a compromise to the graphics. I was not there for the advertisement but I was there to try something I had not done in a long time.
While I admit that WB3 has some nice graphics they were nothing to write home about. The FM still has some issues but according to the devs who dropped in one night they were "on the money" with the flight model and "nothing was going to be changed".
On the warps I was pinging their server at just under 50ms and was getting screen jumps and serious lag. Hell I flew over a base and had one guy 8k below just starting his takeoff roll and literally 3 seconds later he is shooting at me from the front co-alt.
There were only 3 of us in the room and the other guy was on my side 5 sectors away flying a bomber.
Yet another chapter in the online flight simulation game world that will not get any more money from me.
-
Can't really comment on the FM's as I'm not a pilot but they do feel different in the roll rate to any other flight sim I have ever played
I'd be surprised if Wild Bill even knew what AH was nevermind be able to comment on features he liked.
I like the way six views are done in Warbirds, IMHO six views in AH are far too lenient. For the first time in a long time iEN are doing things right, the PTO update arrived without the usual bulls**t, bluster and chest beating that other versions produced by more egotistical team members. This time iEN said what they were going to add in this patch and delivered and to be fair it was a good update. I find the team a lot more approachable than in the past also and they seem more willing to listen to concerns. They are now making some inroads into adding strat with the aid of AI and the ETO map being worked on looks fantastic although I really think they should release a freely available map editor as HTC did, I mean look how many terrains AH has now with more and more being created specially for events. One draw back is the very low numbers online (typically around 40 Euro primetime) so it can feel a little lonely in the arena's sometimes. Things have improved a great deal over there, it's still not as complete as AH and still has some way to go to catch this sim but I really believe if Wild Bill will let the team he has now continue to work unhindered on WBIII then they can really turn things around.
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
In IL-2 you can feel the gyro forces from the prop and recoil from guns etc. stuff as where AH planes fly in direct line.
Wrong. AH has gyroscopic effects and gun recoil. Try taking off in AH without using rudder. Then fly a Hurricane IID and fire the cannons.
As for roll control, I fly in RL and the roll control in AH is reasonably realistic (within the confines of a computer sim of course).
-
DAMN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
add IL-2 graphics engine plus the Fighter/bomber modeling of AH equals you get da best multiplayer WWII sim flight sim to date on AH2.
-
I dont know why do u think engine of AH cant have some things like IL2?
If u put the same fireworks in to AH game will be same slow like FB is.
ramzey
-
all you need to do is turn off combat trim to feel all of the prop effects and whatnot that are in the fm for ah. If you have combat trim on, dont even start discussing flight models.
-
Originally posted by Revvin
I like the way six views are done in Warbirds, IMHO six views in AH are far too lenient.
Don't agree here - in discussions with R/L WWII fighter pilots over the years (Spitfire and Corsair pilots) the one comment they all made when looking at computer flight sims in general was "how do I move my head to look around the seat/canopy frame?".
AH gets pretty close to this idea by allowing you to set your views so you are "looking" around the obstructions. One limitation is that a direct 6 view only allows you to set up for one side of the aircraft if you only have one view hat..
Also the snap view is a pretty close analogy to the way humans shift their view rapidly - try turning your head quickly to look at a point you picked earlier - you close your eyes during the fast transition automatically and then open them when your head stops. This is an instinctive reflex that if overridden will cause you to either fall down, puke, or both.
palef
-
Ive said it before, Im gona say it again...
WB has its controlls WAY WAY WAY too mushy...its like flying with your stick in a vat of grandma's good ol' fassion puddin.
That said, AH controls are somewhat too sharp at low speeds....but just a smidgen...and nowhere near the level of goofiness exibited in WB.
It is true that there is a certain amount of inertia in a rolling plane, and its sure true that WWII fighters are much heavier than many people realize....that said however, you take a wing with an area as large as an F4U has, push it through the air at 300 mph....you arnt gona get the mush factor WB gives you. I sometimes wonder if the mush is there in some wierd attempt to try and mimic the turbulance and uneaven air that is in the real world...but missing in sims due to processing power.....but geez.
Let me end this by saying my flight experience in the "real world" is very limited....but this is the way I see it...and the way freinds of mine with thousands of hours of air under their butts feel too.
-
Apparently a New Zealander veteran Spitfire pilot thought the AH Spitfire was too mushy. Said something like it felt loose and worn out compared with the Spits he flew in the war.
If AH is too mushy, what does that make WBIII?
-
Originally posted by Revvin
I'd be surprised if Wild Bill even knew what AH was nevermind be able to comment on features he liked.
Can't say for sure that it was his Revvin but the guys ingame nick was "WLDBL" and he was making all sorts of comments on AH. I flew over there less than 10 hours total and spent a good deal of time offline getting a feel for it before going on the server. When I was flying it was prime time US (between 8pm - 12 am) and it was a Sunday, Tuesday, Thursday, Friday-Sunday. Weekends I flew different times and never saw more than 45-60 people on all the servers combined. That was just prior to the PTO coming out and while it was still in Beta on the server.
As for the game I ran into some old names from other games and they were not happy. For the most part I gather that the remaining crowd there is waiting on TargetWare to release. Once that happens I would not be surprised if you saw less than 20 people in WB during primetime US hours. But the main thing that turned me off were the simple facts of what I got to calling superwarps of guys taking off that would jump up to several thousand feet and be right on you. It made for some interesting flights and I can only imagine what I appeared to be to them. Hell I warped across four sectors one night and everyone one on my side was jumping all over. The map screen showed dots bouncing all over and that never got any better. In fact it was the last night I played and the next day I went and hit the cancel button and have not looked back.
-
LOL, can't believe I take a break from AGW to get away from the griping only to find this. :D
Seriously though, in answer to some comments. There is a certain amount of control "delay" built into Warbirds III. It's appearance, sometime during the first few months of WBIII development was for two reasons. A. To simulate a certain amount of real world control delay. While the action of moving the stick will indeed move a rudder at the same speed as the stick is moved, no real world control in a WWII aircraft could be pushed around as fast as the stick on your desktop can. In order to get the "feel" of pushing the stick with real force the delay "acts" like it takes X pounds of force to perform Y amount of roll.
B. To eliminate "stick stirring". Some players figured out that if you whack the stick back and fourth fast enough, the FE gets a little confused as to just exactly where your orientation is and receives intermittent 100% inputs in opposite directions. The FE doesn't know any better, it sends this info to the host, and your opponent on your six gets an interesting "dancing plane" to try and shoot at.
While the amount of delay is up for debate and we in fact have looked into changing it, it's existence is a good decision I believe and will remain in the game at least to some degree.
As far as Wildbill goes... he's a salesman, what can I say?
It's been company policy for a long time not to discuss other sims, I'll go whap him on the head for you if you want. ;)
-
Originally posted by Reschke
........................When I was flying it was prime time US (between 8pm - 12 am) and it was a Sunday, Tuesday, Thursday, Friday-Sunday. Weekends I flew different times and never saw more than 45-60 people on all the servers combined. That was just prior to the PTO coming out and while it was still in Beta on the server...................
yeap, i saw that too but
when we fly S3 online was over 200 ppls online, more then any euro event. I not know current friday ToD, possibly more too
ramzey
-
so how do you explain what passes for views and the corsair FM and the "wheel-o-leathiality" that you spin every week? How bout the ol... "wheel-o-damage model" spin you guys do every once in a while.. seems like you listen to about 4 or 6 guys who don't know squat.
lazs
-
Laz, how can I find a nice way of saying "leave me out of that"?
What I mean is, I don't want any blame, or credit, for anything that happened in regards to Warbirds before January. That's when I took the lead designers slot upon HS's departure. Everything before that was on his say so.
Since then we've implemented some great work by the player run FM team to improve the flight models, and accept for bomb damage, weapons and DM's have not changed.
As far as the corsair cockpit, I would point you to our new Spit 14 pit for an idea of where we're headed with cockpit design.
-
Hey Target,
Are you an IEN employee??
Weather you are or not it doesn't really matter I'll ask you anyway.
What makes the FM designers think there was a control deley in aileron response? First off many WW2 fighters had very light ailerons IE FW190, F4U. And even the ones that didn't could be moved to achieved very well documented results. Why would IEN build a lag in response where one did not exist. I may not be a pilot but I do have about 20hours stick time in small A/C and I can garauntee you there is no such deley regardless of P-51 or Cessna. The feeling gives the sensation of being underwater.
FYI, I clocked the F4U rollrate at 300MPH at around 5.5 seconds. That's about 65DPS. I have documents that show 95+DPS with minimal stick force.
Also whats up with not being able to turn you head more than 5DPS? It is very gamey. Because of this WB has never even been more than a novelty.
Also where do you guys get your climb rates and top speeds? I think you have to much annecdotal data in your FM. Some very strange things there indeed.
-
Target,
Thanks for dropping in on us over here. You are welcome to come fly anytime you wish with us in VF-17 if you ever want to get out of the same old rut.
I think when I said he was berating about joining a squadron might have been a bit harsh. It is not something a trial time guy like me wanted to keep hearing. I understand about him wanting his product to be the best; hell if he didn't then something would be wrong in WBland. But from the outside looking in for a brief time there are some really glaring things I would change.
So if you want to shoot me an email I would be willing to put down my experiences in the time since WB3 has been out. I would rather do that than keep on about WB3 in HTC's forum. My email is linked through my profile.
! The invite is open whenever you want to come fly with our small group here in AH.
-
Yes F4U, I'm the lead designer. See my post above vis a vis control delay.
Reschke, feel free to drop me a line at mdavis@ient.com
There is a pile this high (holds hand over his head) of stuff we plan on getting fixed/changed/totally revamped for the next release. Most of it is UI stuff. It's been my opinion for a long time that the biggest impediment to new players in Warbirds has been the interface.
Anyway, would love to hear your thoughts about your time with us.
-
Flew Warbirds for about an hour before i decided i didnt like it. It was about 11 AM and there was only 11 players on..Not my kind of multiplayer game..
-
Originally posted by Target
While the amount of delay is up for debate and we in fact have looked into changing it, it's existence is a good decision I believe and will remain in the game at least to some degree.
The amount of delay isn't what causes trouble. It's simply the problem that the delay (lack of force to move) of the virtual stick/control surfaces doesn't depend on the virtual sticks position/force required, but on the position of the players joystick. As a result moving the virtual stick near the center while the players stick is fully deflected the move is already delayed.
Unless that changed meanwhile, haven't tried it for quite some time now.
-
"...B. To eliminate "stick stirring"....".
I can attest to that. The main reason I and a lot of others left WBs. Most people called it "flopping like a fish". Picture a fish flopping on the end of the line, standing on its head, thrashing about etc. Guys who knew what they were doing could do it for miles without any loss of E. With the lack of gun lethality, it was almost impossible to kill them. Kind of funny in retrospect but very frustrating at the time.
bowser
-
no comparison
-
B. To eliminate "stick stirring". Some players figured out that if you whack the stick back and fourth fast enough, the FE gets a little confused as to just exactly where your orientation is and receives intermittent 100% inputs in opposite directions. The FE doesn't know any better, it sends this info to the host, and your opponent on your six gets an interesting "dancing plane" to try and shoot at.
At last some truth, for years HS would not admit to it being a factor in the slow response.
-
Wrong. AH has gyroscopic effects and gun recoil. Try taking off in AH without using rudder. Then fly a Hurricane IID and fire the cannons.
Sure AH has those.. But the effect of them is tenfold smaller than in IL2. I don't know which one is more accurate, but IL2 is the first game where I had to practise 5 times before I could take off without the gyro effect flipping my plane over at full throttle.
In AH you can apply full throttle and pull stick back at stall limit with _no_ danger whatsoever of losing control as long as you don't pull enough to stall the plane. AH planes go like on rails once you get them to the air where IL-2 planes react strongly to throttle, speed and AOA.
There's a huge difference in modeling. AH used to be more like IL earlier, I remember the effect on c-hog taking off. It's gone now.
-
I don't know which product you're talking about, but in the case of 1C's latest release "Forgotten Battles", a lot of the funky wobbling that infested the previous title "IL-2", is gone.
It is actually kind of interesting to see IL-2 FM change into something that resembles AH FM very closely. After Forgotten Battles was released, there was this incredible whining about how they 'neutered' the FM - pretty funny to see people who so enthusiastically worshipped 1C developers, suddenly turn against them just because the FM became 'easier'.
Forgotten Battles, is a lot like AH now. I think that means something.
-
Kweassa I only own the Forgotten Battles, played IL2 original only in demos.
I'm talking about FB flight model now when I'm comparing.
/edit
So they changed the FM? I was kinda wondering about that, the demo I tried seemed to be even harder to fly. I remember dogfights being like balancing on a glass ball and shooting arrows.
Still as it is, I find the FM much more challenging than the one in AH. Especially when it comes to gunnery.
-
Originally posted by Target
LOL, can't believe I take a break from AGW to get away from the griping only to find this. :D
Seriously though, in answer to some comments. There is a certain amount of control "delay" built into Warbirds III. It's appearance, sometime during the first few months of WBIII development was for two reasons. A. To simulate a certain amount of real world control delay. While the action of moving the stick will indeed move a rudder at the same speed as the stick is moved, no real world control in a WWII aircraft could be pushed around as fast as the stick on your desktop can. In order to get the "feel" of pushing the stick with real force the delay "acts" like it takes X pounds of force to perform Y amount of roll.
Sorry, but Palef posted an interview with a Spit pilot several months ago. The question was specifically asked about 'snap' ability of controls. His response was it was a 'snap' response, just like we see in AH. So, from the horses mouth, you are quite incorrect.
The stickstirring reason is fair enough. However I think the HTC solution to this is better, as mushing the stick detracts from the enjoyment and FM of the game.
-
no offense target but... I trust WB to screw it all up and I don't trust em to tell the truth. Maybe you are new but..
lazs
-
Lazs is jealous because WBIII has early war planes that are actually flown in a competitive manner. :p :p
Really, you should trust Target till he burns you (which I doubt will happen).
Kekule
18th Sentai
-
I like AH overall, but the reason I stay in Warbirds is that it feels more realistic. The axis vs allied arena, the RPS, the more complete early war planeset, the S3's. I can go on, but thats it for me. My trial with AH was about a year ago, and it felt too much like warbirds did around v 2.0.
-
the funny thing is i think that in ww2 the plane wouldent flip on the runwayunless you did something stupid like nose forward to much
and just because the fm is harder that doesnt make it realistic
-
Target, good to see you around m'dear. Glad you feel that the team can now progress some stuff that has long needed seeing to in WBIII, and I look forard to seeing the results!
Regarding the stick-stirring problem, maybe you want to get someone to look at how the program code can detect probable stick-stirring and only "mush" THAT, rather than mushing all inputs. :-}
Esme (an ex "Dead Sticks" member and proud of it!)
-
Vorticon you just pointed out one major thing.. AH planes need _no_ nose down while accelerating on runway. Just keep stick centered, apply a little rudder and up you go steady as on rails.
Just face it, AH has a simplified engine management and flight model to attract a larger base of players. HT would be stupid to do anything else.
The planes have to be easy enough to fly for a player first time on the sticks. This is a reality, not realism.
-
HEY ESME!!! Long time no see!
Yeah, we've got a really good team now with a hands off management style. Can't ask for more than that. Here's hoping we don't drop the ball. :)
I remember lots of our conversations about level bombing and gameplay. I hope to do the bombers proud in future updates.
Hey guys, you may or may not know it, but this community has a fantastic resource in Esme. No finer leader of virtual squad.
Chow bella! :D
-
Originally posted by Target
I hope to do the bombers proud in future updates.
Chow bella! :D
Now that sounds interesting tell us more! :D
-
Good to see you, Target. :)
Drex
-
With the success of TOT the new third bomber enhancement will be TOC or Tons On Country. Rather than having to bother with hitting targets, or even hitting an area, now you can simply put your bomber in enemy airspace and let loose all your bombs to hit all your enemy at once.
-
LOL try taking off without the auto take off...i have to use about all the rudder ...
you think its easy for a beginner to fly??? you probably think its unrealisitc not ot be able to completly control your plane with trim as well yah nark...
it takes about 3 or 4 hours to get decent at flying...thats for someones first time on the sticks as you phrase it
you probably think it was a bad idea to add mouse control instead of making people be stuck on the keyboard like in il2...
ohj yeah and to all you joystick users ourt there welll :p MY mouse gives even the shoddiest planes fast roll rates
-
lol Zanth :)
Sounds about right..........
Tonnage dropped in enemy airspace lol
-
Question:
After M'Dear and Cioa Bella I'm thinking or hoping that either Target or Esme is a chick. Please tell me this is the case.
Next,
Did some testing on the lastest version of WBIII last night.
Nice graphics, like the tracer effects and DX9 sure does make that thing run and look better.
But the two things that need to be changed in that game before I can take it seriously are the 6 view and the roll inertia.
Funny thing is the one A/C that does not have or has the least roll inertia is the P-38L. It has almost an immediate response to control input and it should be the one to have the most initial hesitation to roll. Also the turn radius of this bird is like a Zeke. Someone at IEN has a real boner for the 38.
Also Target, what did you mean by "Check the Spit XIV cockpit". Why is it different than the others?
Do you have plans to change the 6 view??
-
TOT is an absolute joke, I hope HTC never introduces such a gamey system.
-
Vorticon I'm sorry to see you completely missed the point.
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA
Also Target, what did you mean by "Check the Spit XIV cockpit". Why is it different than the others?
Do you have plans to change the 6 view??
Post deleted, didn't mean to offend. F4U, if you would like to discuss it I guess you can just email me or come over to the design board.
Sorry all. Just trying to answer a question.
-
Originally posted by Target
...Since I'm tossing around screenshots anyway, I'll toot my own horn and show ya this one. I think I did OK with it...
uhmmm, are you lost?
-
#1 target those graphics suck
#2 siaf i honestly dont give a **** anymore....you can stick to your gameygame ill stick to my FLIGHT SIM!!!
-
Graphics arent anything to backflip over...Plus eye candy is only a minor part to a game.
Now that terrain needs some serious work.
-
or is it kinda wierd to have a WB developer hanging out on the AH forums, "tooting his horn" so to speak?
-
Is it just me or does anyone else consider it bad form for a competing company to have one of their game designers post screenshots of their game on a competitors message boards in a rather vain and pathetic attempt to drum up customers in another vain and pathetic attempt to keep that game afloat?
No offense Target, I'm sure you're really proud of the work you've done but it is extremely rude for you to advertise WB III on this message board in an attempt to drum up more business. Do you really think that Wild Bill would let Superfly or NateDog post screenshots of AH/AH2 on the WB forums?
Ack-Ack
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Is it just me or does anyone else consider it bad form for a competing company to have one of their game designers post screenshots of their game on a competitors message boards in a rather vain and pathetic attempt to drum up customers in another vain and pathetic attempt to keep that game afloat?
No offense Target, I'm sure you're really proud of the work you've done but it is extremely rude for you to advertise WB III on this message board in an attempt to drum up more business. Do you really think that Wild Bill would let Superfly or NateDog post screenshots of AH/AH2 on the WB forums?
Ack-Ack
I think its despicable and shows that the developers and staff are desparate for customers.
I bet Dale lets them continue to post here because he feels sorry for them.
I know I feel sorry for anyone who flis WBs.
****ty game, just ****ty....
-
Seriously didn't mean to offend anyone. Just trying to answer F4U's question. It's my understanding that Dale and crew pretty actively monitor this forum, I would assume if they had a problem they would have moved or deleted the thread.
Anyway, the offending screenshots have been removed. I like coming over here to see how AH is developing. Hope I'm still welcome. Again, my apologies.
-
Last time I looked at WBIII was just after they added the Spitfire Mk XIV (hey, its my favorite WWII aircraft), and it in no way matched the British reports on it. It was slow, climbed horribly, and couldn't turn very well. That aircraft would never have been accepted for service given how much better WBIII's 1942 Merlin 61 Spitfire Mk IX is.
The FM on the Spit XIV was a joke.
The FM on the Mossie VI was pretty poor too.
-
Originally posted by Target
Seriously didn't mean to offend anyone. Just trying to answer F4U's question. It's my understanding that Dale and crew pretty actively monitor this forum, I would assume if they had a problem they would have moved or deleted the thread.
Anyway, the offending screenshots have been removed. I like coming over here to see how AH is developing. Hope I'm still welcome. Again, my apologies.
I think it is fine for you to come here to have discussions, talk to old friends, etc. However it was the WB sales pitch that bothered me.
...of course I don't work for HTC, and maybe they don't mind.
I don't think many of the WB community would appreciate HT or Pyro posting screenies of AH on AGW though.
F.
-
Target,
Didn't get to see your original post. Almost whish I had now.
I wasn't being sarcastic but I was not kidding either.
When I looked at the Spit XIV I wasn't looking for nicer graphics. I was looking for a more realistic six view. And honestly in A/C with a bubble canopy it is not bad at all. I however fly the F4U almost exclusively and I don't think the 6 view in the F4U is fairly represented. In anycase that it what I was looking at.
As far as the P-38L goes. I have quite a bit of documentation that says a P-38L shoundn't turn nearly as well as it does in WBIII. Just looking at my P-38L flight Manual and the stall speed listed ae not that impressive. What in the IEN design team would make me believe otherwise? Also the low speed roll is too high even by Lockheed specs.
Here is a chart I got from Vought Aircraft showing the stall of the P-38J to be higher than the P-47D. Feel free to download any documents on my webpage.
(http://mywebpages.comcast.net/markw4/alliedchrts2.jpg)
-
Target,
Why not just turn around and look??
Is this fairly represented?
(http://mywebpages.comcast.net/markw4/f4ucockpit.jpg)
-
There has been something "wrong" with the WB F4U all the way back to the 2.5 days. While performing at "speed" or in a dive as one would think it should, it bleeds like a stuck pig, always has, prolly always will. Energy conserving turns make no difference, do a couple in them and it bleeds out.
I'm not a pencil pushin show me a graph kinda guy. When a Hog takes more disipline then a Jug to fly, graphs don't do me diddly.
Similar problem in the 190 that was reticfied and then recended for what reason I'll never know. "I'll never know" is a common feeling when I discuss WB.
Target's good people. He has the passion.
Let's put it this way Target, you build it, and they will come.
But at this point in time, Dale hasn't a thing to worry about..
..and I'd be suspect of the "concensus" of those left, to point you in the right direction. That being evident by the disdain for a fun, packed arena..
But that's just one opinion, or maybe 500..
-
Anyone who thinks "their" game has a realistic FM is kidding themselves. They are all games, none are perfect or even close.
"My flight sim is better than yours, and 60381 other dweebs agree with me!" *yawn*
One thing is for sure, the FM for the WB Ki-43 is vastly superior than the one in AH or any other flight sim, PERIOD!!
Nopoop, ya bastige! :p
Kekule
18th Sentai
-
naturally the fm for thje ki-43 is better...since we dont have one i could make a **** model of one with the fm of that little spaceship in asteroids and STILL have a better flight model!!!
-
Vorticon why are you so defensive?
siaf i honestly dont give a **** anymore....you can stick to your gameygame ill stick to my FLIGHT SIM!!!
And which gameygame is my game? FYI I have played AH extensively, far far more than I'll ever play IL2. Don't make accusations on subjects you know nothing about.
You get all worked up while others are trying to have a discussion.. what's up with that?
-
Target, model a Fiat G.55 "Centauro" and I'll reopen my WB account. Model the mighty G.56 and I'll even close my AH account ;)
-
mih i just like to make a seen
-
long as you have no 6 view, no customers and no corsair worth flying along with a mushy FM for every plane.... I will stay away.
When it all get's fixed... let's talk about it again.... I don't intend to be a martyr for years like the poor slobs who are "patiently" waiting for WB to not be such a joke. I woulda wasted a year or two if I would have stayed there lstening to promises by former curren or future WB staff..
believe it when I see it...
improvements in WB are just vaporware to me.
lazs
(guess I should add... nothing against you personaly target... to early yet)
-
1st Thing! Hey Target, old squaddie of mine. :) Yippers!
2nd Thing! Would the new management at WBs be this lienient if HT and Pyro posted on their BBS? Just wondering......
3rd Thing! As an EX 6 year customer of WBs, everything that has been said here is quite accurate. There are 2 reasons I left. The WBs Engine is "PORKED". A spaggetti Bowl. They pull on one noodle and move 2-3 others fixing something and "pooching" something else. This is why progress is sooooo slow. Certainly not Targets fault. The other is bad connects, mirco warps when in close proximity to other planes. I have Cable and talked to SKYDVR a lot! You'd do a HO merge sliding past the other plane at D-8, 800 here and lose a wing?? Just had enough of that.
Finally! I remain loyal to NO SIMM. The best one gets my money and I could care less about cost! Ok, I might care a bit :)
GL All!
-
...Dodges grenade throw by Kek ( the dirty bastage )
Quick reversal and opens up with:
Kill stats 11 days into the tour...
Ki-61 405 kills, 368 deaths, K/D of 1.10
It's early yet, last tour in the 24 hour a day "uber" arena..
Ki-61 has 1723 Kills and 1166 deaths against all models..
Damm paper airplanes..
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
In IL-2 you can feel the gyro forces from the prop and recoil from guns etc. stuff as where AH planes fly in direct line.
try turning off auto trim
-
Atkmkrstr: I started playing AH so long time ago that there was no autotrim and even the flight model was totally different.
Don't try to patronise me n00b.
-
No poop get the kill stats for his ki-43........
6 kills per tour or so is my guess in that packed arena.........
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
I don't know which product you're talking about, but in the case of 1C's latest release "Forgotten Battles", a lot of the funky wobbling that infested the previous title "IL-2", is gone.
It is actually kind of interesting to see IL-2 FM change into something that resembles AH FM very closely. After Forgotten Battles was released, there was this incredible whining about how they 'neutered' the FM - pretty funny to see people who so enthusiastically worshipped 1C developers, suddenly turn against them just because the FM became 'easier'.
Forgotten Battles, is a lot like AH now. I think that means something.
After hearing how accurate FB was I bought a copy and tried it online - not at all different in FM from other games I've played - FA or AH - gunnery is a little more difficult but at an overall game I found FB to be very dissapointing and VERY biased towards Soviet a/c.
The online flying is 1000 foot 8 person dogfights where bases are two miles apart - the online "war" they try to have going takes like 20 mins to get up and running for 15 mins of flying.
First sim I've seen that offline is better than online.
-
"I am not now nor will I ever be a disgruntled WBs player. I cut my teeth there. I just got tired of waiting for unfullfilled promises and low numbers. I got totally sick of the micro-warps/connects. If WarBirds ever becomes more satisfying to me then Aces High, I'm back there in a heart beat. Dracon"
Must agree dracon,
spent 3 years or so at warbirds, my first online flight sim, always liked the game and the community, still do. But .... on euro time slot AH is the game with numbers.
wipass
-
I play both games. Been with WB online at home when they had the NG camplain. Started AH when it first came out as beta. Did my 2 weeks when it went for pay then stayed away. I came back I think when 1.5 was release and been around since. I like both games. I know more people in WB than I do here. Thats why I'm still there. But I don't know anything about how each aircraft should fly or what. How the hell would I know! I've never flown one in real life. I just go up and have fun. I like both games. They each have good points and their bad. But they are fun never less. Right now tho I like AH a little better. I'm really looking forward to AH2 when it comes out.
One thing I do like about HiTech is that they only have one game. So all their engry is on that game. When you try to do several games with no staff, something gets short shaffed. And I think that's what happened to WB3.
-
My most memorable sortie in WBs ever was the hop where I shot down five (5) F4Fs (all different players) with a Ki-43 and had 98 rounds left.
Loved that FM.
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Vorticon you just pointed out one major thing.. AH planes need _no_ nose down while accelerating on runway. Just keep stick centered, apply a little rudder and up you go steady as on rails.
Just face it, AH has a simplified engine management and flight model to attract a larger base of players.
Gee, I've been flying real taildraggers the wrong way for a long time, apparently.
So you're supposed to push forward on a taildragger's stick during takeoff roll?
Man, I've been way off. I always keep the tailwheel firmly planted with back stick until I have enough airspeed to make the rudder effective enough to counter any crosswind or P-factor.
Then I ease the stick to a near neutral position until I get just about to "flying speed".
Then I just ease in a touch of aft stick and as the plane accelerates she just gently lifts into the air.
I'll have to try this "push forward" on the stick during takeoff next time.
But first, I want to have a lawyer go over my will and make sure it's up to date, check with my aircraft insurance company to make sure I'm current and go over the details of my funeral with the morturary one last time.
-
lol, Toad!
-
I haven't flown WB3 in a long time, however, I can tell there is not such thing as roll inertia or control delay in real life. It's common sense- the aerodynamic forces are dominant on the wing, and, when you move the ailerons, the flow adjust instantaneously. And, of course, most of the weight on the wing is placed as close to the root as possible, therefore the moment of inertia is small.
Even when flying at 50knots, in the slow flight regime (pilots know what I'm talking about), when the plane feels kinda mushy, there still is no such thing as roll delay or roll inertia.
-
Hi All:
The one thing I really liked about WB3 were the custom skins - I really wish they'd give you that option here (they do in IL-2 as well). The things that made me switch to Aces High from WB3 were the spongey FM and lack of customizable head positions......plus, the remaining WB community is small, and dying off..
Cheers,
P
-
Originally posted by Toad
Gee, I've been flying real taildraggers the wrong way for a long time, apparently.
So you're supposed to push forward on a taildragger's stick during takeoff roll?
Man, I've been way off. I always keep the tailwheel firmly planted with back stick until I have enough airspeed to make the rudder effective enough to counter any crosswind or P-factor.
Then I ease the stick to a near neutral position until I get just about to "flying speed".
Then I just ease in a touch of aft stick and as the plane accelerates she just gently lifts into the air.
I'll have to try this "push forward" on the stick during takeoff next time.
But first, I want to have a lawyer go over my will and make sure it's up to date, check with my aircraft insurance company to make sure I'm current and go over the details of my funeral with the morturary one last time.
Toad, when I took tailwheel in a Citabria I had to give her just a brief "pop" of forward stick at about 40 mph to get the tail up, then back to about neutral for the takeoff. I think it's plane-dependant on whether or not the tail is blanketed by the wing when sitting on the tailwheel.
Frankly, it sounded wrong to me at the time, too. And it seems unnatural, and scared the crap outa me the first few times.
-
I just installed warbirds yesterday. i love the tracers comming out from the Fw-190. I give WB a B+.
-
Originally posted by Pauldoe
The one thing I really liked about WB3 were the custom skins - I really wish they'd give you that option here (they do in IL-2 as well).
Hmmm.... I can't see GVs and planes against the terrain that well... I'll just reskin them all in international orange so I can see them better. It's not really cheating if everyone else can do it, too...
-
The Game itself and Community are great ! (IMO)
Just the way its Managed and Marketed will likely cause its demise
-
The people in Warbirds are desperate to teach newbs
-
Originally posted by Ike 2K#
The people in Warbirds are desperate to teach newbs
They're desperate because they're finnally reading the writing on the wall. :(
-
I wish HTC would merge with iEN. If they merge, we would have the great FM model of AH and the eyecandy of WB3 in less than 8 months.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Apparently a New Zealander veteran Spitfire pilot thought the AH Spitfire was too mushy. Said something like it felt loose and worn out compared with the Spits he flew in the war.
If AH is too mushy, what does that make WBIII?
You know I can see what he means - to me the AH spit is responsive enough but it is not crisp like a 190.
-
Originally posted by Ike 2K#
I wish HTC would merge with iEN. If they merge, we would have the great FM model of AH and the eyecandy of WB3 in less than 8 months.
Thats not possible.
HTC and crew could never decipher WB3's code.
In fact even the WB3 team have a hard time deciphering it :D
-
So they're still using HT's code in WBIII ?
-
IL2FB and AH FM very very close. As a matter of fact I can't tell much difference between the 190A8s. It appears you have to get a tad closer to register good hits in IL2FB.
All in all, IL2FB is a great sim....I like it a great deal. For a boxed Sim.........it's the best I've seen in almost 20 years.
-
Originally posted by Hajo
IL2FB and AH FM very very close. As a matter of fact I can't tell much difference between the 190A8s. It appears you have to get a tad closer to register good hits in IL2FB.
All in all, IL2FB is a great sim....I like it a great deal. For a boxed Sim.........it's the best I've seen in almost 20 years.
Muzzle Flashes... :mad: