Author Topic: Last Day of First RPS (Read 868 times)

Panzzer · « **Reply #15 on:** February 18, 2006, 07:37:59 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AutoPilot
This new set up will bore quicker than PAcific by a mile.

IMHO

Hmm.. 2 weeks, with a new terrain - I've a hard time believing it will get old, but maybe I'm just extending my positivity...

Back to the subject: let's make this last day of this RPS a day to remember.

StarOfAfrica2 · « **Reply #16 on:** February 18, 2006, 09:03:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AutoPilot
Of course you think that your from Finnland Duh

The donut map was more awaited than any other recently that i have seen.

Hate too differ but, a lot of people enjoy the Pacific Setup,even before they changed the name of the CT and others started showin up.On thursday nights there was plenty of us in there enjoying the pacific set up and throughout the week as well.

This new set up will bore quicker than PAcific by a mile.

IMHO

I dont know, maybe you just havent seen it? I dont know how you could have missed it, but the Pac setups are some of the most whined about, most disregarded and most avoided maps we have. Not because of the maps, but because one side totally believes the Japanese planes are porked and the other side totally believes the Allied planes are.

Personally I wish they'd just switch sides shut up and fight. Ah well.

Seriously though, people seem to hate the Pac maps for some reason. The negativity twins here arent alone.

StarOfAfrica2 · « **Reply #17 on:** February 18, 2006, 09:04:53 PM »

As to the map thats current, today saw some of the best fights I've seen in there in awhile. I'm still rusty as heck and the squirrely 109 gives me a good excuse to lose too, but it was alot of fun.

Panzzer · « **Reply #18 on:** February 18, 2006, 09:09:44 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by StarOfAfrica2
As to the map thats current, today saw some of the best fights I've seen in there in awhile. I'm still rusty as heck and the squirrely 109 gives me a good excuse to lose too, but it was alot of fun.

Just the kind of feedback we need here.

Why do all the people whine about petty details, when they have better fights than "almost ever in the MA"... Oh well, I guess it is too much to expect to have positive feedback in here (and I haven't done anything lately, the rest of the staff should get the positive feedback).

AutoPilot · « **Reply #19 on:** February 18, 2006, 10:31:24 PM »

Quote

but the Pac setups are some of the most whined about

we havn't had the pac set up in a RPS yet either,so how can everybody be for certain it will suck?

killnu · « **Reply #20 on:** February 18, 2006, 11:04:23 PM »

i flew on the new map in the SEA, and it was the best looking terrain i have seen since the one Fester made with authentic fields(that was later changed back to normal). look forward to seeing that setup.
~S~

StarOfAfrica2 · « **Reply #21 on:** February 19, 2006, 12:31:37 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by AutoPilot
we havn't had the pac set up in a RPS yet either,so how can everybody be for certain it will suck?

Actually they HAVE done RPS on a PTO map. Right after the Ki-84 came out they tried it (and RPS is not a new thing, its been tried several times in the past). The thing that made THIS RPS work, IMO, is first off they stretched it out long enough that folks really got a good taste of each "era" of the war. Secondly, we had enough numbers start showing up that it made the RPS more workable. Spit I's vs 109s gets real old when there's only 3 or 4 of ya on each side and you have to fly across the channel. Might as well go to the DA, shorter distance to the furball there.

I'm GLAD the RPS is working, and I hope it becomes a mainstay of the AvA arena. I flew alot in the AvA arena in Air Warrior, and always enjoyed it. As we get more planes in the japanese planeset, the PTO will really come into its own. Heck, just having a Betty and a Ki-43 would help immensely. But anyway, I digress. The point of this is, this has been done before and its failed before (although I have to say the RPS they did when the Ki-84 came out was probably the most popular PTO setup we've had in a long time, so maybe if the numbers continue this one will exceed that mark). Only with everyone continuing to work together and keep the ball rolling will this succeed.

StarOfAfrica2 · « **Reply #22 on:** February 19, 2006, 12:33:40 AM »

And just for the record, I'm really looking forward to trying the new map. Its been awhile since we got to try a new one, and this one sounds great. We've been BEGGING for more realistic maps, we need to give this one a chance.

TheBug · « **Reply #23 on:** February 19, 2006, 11:07:56 AM »

I think the best way to incorporate the IJ planes into a RPS at this current stage in the planeset is by using an Axis versus Allies setup, utilizing all planes being added over a timeline, not having it Theater specific. Although it strays from the historical type setup it may still be interesting to see how the planes stack up against each other. Possibly using a neutral style map, not historical, with the emphasize being made on game-play.

Just an idea..

Shifty · « **Reply #24 on:** February 19, 2006, 11:19:28 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by TheBug

Just an idea..

And a good one.

One thing I don't see is how is the Ki-43 is going to save the PTO planeset. Yeah it's got a little more manuverability over the A6M2 but thats it. The Ki-43 has nothing for fire power , and burns every bit as bright as an A6M2.

Plus if the Finns can have a FM2 for a Buffalo , why can't the BF-110 substitute for the KI-45?

TheBug · « **Reply #25 on:** February 19, 2006, 11:32:51 AM »

Although I agree with you about the Ki-43 and feel that the A6m2 would do more than it's share representing, performance wise, the entire IJ fighter force of the early war years(historically speaking). It is the lack of diversity that I think would come from a PTO RPS, that would cause for player's lack of enthusiasm.

But I am only mentioning that in the name of constructive criticism. I personally would enjoy a PTO RPS even with the planeset we have and utilizing a small amount of subbing. But I am suspicious of the number it would generate, but it may be worth a try. That's a tough one.

storch · « **Reply #26 on:** February 19, 2006, 03:39:34 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Shifty
And a good one.

One thing I don't see is how is the Ki-43 is going to save the PTO planeset. Yeah it's got a little more manuverability over the A6M2 but thats it. The Ki-43 has nothing for fire power , and burns every bit as bright as an A6M2.

Plus if the Finns can have a FM2 for a Buffalo , why can't the BF-110 substitute for the KI-45?

I agree but it would add a little more variety as it burns slower and prettier, the addition of the Ki45 would go a long way to adding dimension to the planeset, for many of us anyway.

Shifty · « **Reply #27 on:** February 19, 2006, 04:03:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by storch
I agree but it would add a little more variety as it burns slower and prettier, the addition of the Ki45 would go a long way to adding dimension to the planeset, for many of us anyway.

Yeah if there are subs allowed for one setup, there should be subs allowed for others with a limited plane set to choose from. We could also figure out something to represent the Ki-44 , and J2M , to fill in a few other gaps.

kanttori · « **Reply #28 on:** February 19, 2006, 04:51:59 PM »

Substitutes (skinning some plane to another) are technical possible. Those special skins are coming always with the current terrain. For ex. I am going to update Okinawa later in this spring and I can add there specific Okinawa skins to some planes.

We can plan this more with the AvA Stuff, but give me wishes what planes you want to the Okinawa. But remeber that the aircrafts must resemble each other and their performance characteristics must be about the same.

I need also profile pictures and photos from those planes which you want there. Then I should ask from Greebo very politely if he can do those skins to the map's update!;)