Author Topic: Please..An honest post.. (Read 1624 times)

K West · « **Reply #45 on:** December 04, 2001, 01:46:00 PM »

Maverick I have been posting to get the CT changed also. Other than some reported feedback from Pyro when he was online there's been no response form HTC on the subject. However that has nothing to do with the MA which is a seperate topic altogether. Trying to get an historical representation of WWII radar in use in AH's MA is not a back up plan to getting the CT setup. I basically find the MA radar to be lame and as unrealistic as I do the pinpoint accuracy that bombers get when dropping from 30k. Or flaps that autoretract upon hitting xxx airspeed. Or ability to pul out of a blacked out dive by hitting X. So should anyone who wants anything changed in the MA shut up because some folks are more than ready to settle for the status quo in there? How about ack lethality? Or ease of fleet destruction? What about ground vehicles? Should they have to go to another arena because someone such as you says things stay the way they are...period? I think not.

However on the other subject of radar? I'm for realism. You're not. that's about as simple as it can be condensed I imagine. I find that a tad ironic seeing how you think collisions should be mutually destructive because that was more historcially realistic while tossing out the technical and social reason for the way it is. Not gameplay reasons. Very real technical and social problems.

And as for WWII being long over. What's your point with that? Why are you here flying a WWII P-51 (or any other AH plane) against other WWII aircraft? Go read HTC's front page if you need to figure out what AH is about and why many of us are here. Start where it says,"Aces High takes the art and science of vintage WWII air combat and set it in a hig intensity environment..." I for one just don't see anything WWII vintage in the AH radar.

Westy

[ 12-04-2001: Message edited by: O'Westy ]

Maverick · « **Reply #46 on:** December 04, 2001, 01:59:00 PM »

Westy,

You STILL miss the point. You HAVE an arena that has the dar situation you want. USE IT. If the changes you want draw the players there then you have a point for making that change in the MA. Until then you are,what appears to me to be,a very vocal but small minority. Why should you dictate the conditions in the MA???

As to the comment about WW2. I come here to fly for fun. This is a game, entertainment, not a historical reenactment of WW2. I don't know what your motivation is for playing. I also don't know why you insist on modifying the MA when you have most of waht you want in the CT. Lobby to change that one and enjoy it.

K West · « **Reply #47 on:** December 04, 2001, 02:13:00 PM »

I'm missing your point obviously. Maybe because your burying it with unfound accusations and misinterpretatons of what I and others have said. I'm not dictating to anyone. I'm lobbying for a change in something I find to be pretty bogus. Nothing different than anyone else on any other subject they've asked HTC to look at for change. As for how or what the CT is set up for? It's irrelevant to the discussion imo. I enjoy the MA with the exception of the completely unrealistic radar. Although I would naturally also think the radar in the CT should be more like what WWII had and not something found on a patrolling JSTARS platform. If I flew there.

To give you a taste of your own medicine how about if you want HTC to model mutual death collisions that you should lobby them to change it in to the way you want in the CT and you go there?

Westy

[ 12-04-2001: Message edited by: O'Westy ]

Maverick · « **Reply #48 on:** December 04, 2001, 03:03:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by O'Westy:
I'm missing your point obviously. Maybe because your burying it with unfound accusations and misinterpretatons of what I and others have said. I'm not dictating to anyone. I'm lobbying for a change in something I find to be pretty bogus. Nothing different than anyone else on any other subject they've asked HTC to look at for change. As for how or what the CT is set up for? It's irrelevant to the discussion imo. I enjoy the MA with the exception of the completely unrealistic radar. Although I would naturally also think the radar in the CT should be more like what WWII had and not something found on a patrolling JSTARS platform. If I flew there.

To give you a taste of your own medicine how about if you want HTC to model mutual death collisions that you should lobby them to change it in to the way you want in the CT and you go there?

Westy

[ 12-04-2001: Message edited by: O'Westy ]

Westy,

I did lobby for a change in collisions. I posted more than once about it. I saw no reason to continue to bring it up after I made my point clear. I didn't start multiple threads about it, as a matter of fact I didn't start a single thread about it. I just posted i an existing thread.

What have I misinterpreted in your post? In this very postI quoted you bring up the opinion you find the dar as "bogus" in the MA. You are lobbying for a change in the MA. I saw that and am lobbying against the change you want to make about the dar. Where have I misinterpreted that?

I brought up the CT as I found it already has most of the changes in dar that have been complained about. If the CT were modified to be compatible with the MA and scores (aka perks) players could swap back and forth and there would be no loss to anyone who wanted to spend time there as well as the MA. I see that as a win win situation. What is wrong with that? Hell I'd even go to the CT for a change of pace now and then.

The second reason I brought up the CT is so that you could have what you want with NO penalty in the game and those of us who like the MA dar could have what we want.

Now if you are insisting that the dar change in the MA then you are in fact trying to dictate how I play. That I will object to and have done so. I see no reason why I should not. I don't understand why you are offended about my objection unless it is simply the fact that I have a differing opinion than you that you object to.

K West · « **Reply #49 on:** December 04, 2001, 03:35:00 PM »

I'm never offended with an opposing opinion (unless it's directed at the wife or children). Just in it's presentation. If it contains inuendo, twists on words (or ideas) and distorted facts then the frustration slevels rise and things begin to get personal. With your posts prior o the one above I felt you were doing all of the above to the people (not just me) whose stance was pro-realism - as regards to the current AH radar anyway.

Westy

Nifty · « **Reply #50 on:** December 04, 2001, 03:40:00 PM »

Mav, last I checked, the only people that "dictate" what goes on in the MA are the guys in Grapevine. Westy is right. He and others are asking for a change in the MA. You and others are asking for the change not to happen. He's no more dictating how the MA should be than you are. He pays the same amount of money to play the game as you do. He has just as much of a right to voice his opinions about a change as you do to come and argue against the change. In fact doing so in a civil manner (just once I'd like to see Lazs do that... naw, Lazs is funny with his "accountants of the sky" stuff!) is healthy, for us and for the game.

BTW, did you see my dar suggestions in the other post? What are your thoughts on it? Do you feel it'd keep someone from being able to "find the fight"?

CRASH · « **Reply #51 on:** December 04, 2001, 09:16:00 PM »

At 3 1/2 miles you can tell the difference between a 109 and a spit? I'm skeptical.

CRASH

Quote

Originally posted by Furious:
Sorry, but i will have to disagree on the icon issue.

In the MA there are no regulations on what types of aircraft or countries aircraft anyone may fly. So seeing a colored dot gives you no indication as to which side any con belongs to.

6k icon range equates to 3.4 miles. At that distance, in real life, I could tell the difference between Axis and Allied fighters. I would know which were bad guys and which were good by the aircraft types. That luxury is not afforded to us in the MA.

The reduced icon range works well in the CT because friendly icon range is increased.

See the following thread for my thoughts on dar:
http://www.hitechcreations.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=8&t=001917

F.

Maverick · « **Reply #52 on:** December 04, 2001, 09:26:00 PM »

Nifty,

If the MA changes to satisfy the requests of those wanting to reduce the dar it would severely diminish my appreciation for the game.

There is an alternative to that where almost everyone can get what they want dar and icon wise.

I have stated my opinion and am done with this issue.

lazs1 · « **Reply #53 on:** December 05, 2001, 08:24:00 AM »

rip said.. "Nice attempt Laz, no ones listening though.
--------------------

VMF-323 ~DEATH RATTLERS~ MAG-33"

It's ok rip... so long as u are... all the effort is worth it. (actually I don't give a toejam but since you are so interested in me it... just seemed like a polite thing to say).
lazs

straffo · « **Reply #54 on:** December 05, 2001, 08:39:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by CRASH:
At 3 1/2 miles you can tell the difference between a 109 and a spit? I'm skeptical.

CRASH

It depend of the aspect (*) of the plane ...
if you see the wings it's obvious at something like 10km ... I've been able to spot from ground and differenciate (sp?) F4U , P51 Spit and Yak at about this distance (and yes the yak look like a toy compared to the US monster

).
<edit>typoooooooooooooooooosss as usual ...
(*)cross section ?

[ 12-05-2001: Message edited by: straffo ]

Maverick · « **Reply #55 on:** December 05, 2001, 01:34:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by straffo:

It depend of the aspect (*) of the plane ...
if you see the wings it's obvious at something like 10km ... I've been able to spot from ground and differenciate (sp?) F4U , P51 Spit and Yak at about this distance (and yes the yak look like a toy compared to the US monster ).
<edit>typoooooooooooooooooosss as usual ...
(*)cross section ?

[ 12-05-2001: Message edited by: straffo ]

You are saying you can spot the difference between a spit and a 109 at 10k??? That is 32,500 feet. I think you'd be darn lucky just to spot it at all from the ground much less from the cockpit of a flying plane.

What do I base this on?? Having to spot aircraft, even large ones in the air while flying towards an airport. Even knowing WHERE to look they are damn tough to spot.