Most other games that have "arcade" mode have relaxed physics, relaxed rules that greatly simplify the entire game code underneath it.
That's what AWs RR/FR difference was, the arena code itself was processing things differently.
In Aces High you don't have this. The rules are all the same. The density of the air is the same. The ballistics of the gun and lethality of the round is the same.
AH has relaxed physics in takeoff runs and landings, especially concerning the importance of tail wheel locks, combating dangers of groundloops, importance of hardened tarmac/airstrip vs. just 'ground', ditching a plane at speeds, maintaining rate of descent at landings. IL2 may not be as frustrating as Targetware in takeoff and landing runs, but it does require the presence of some discipline and practice in getting to learn the proper method of take off and landings. It's simply more realistic and coherent.
Therefore, your asserion that AH is inherently different other games by being 'born into the realism caste' is false.
Players may choose how they interact WITH that set of physics rules, but they may not bypass them.
That is why AH does not now, nor has it ever had, an "arcade" feel.
AH bypasses certain sets of physics upon need, as mentioned above. Therefore it can certainly feel "arcade" to gamers who play IL2 or Targetware, where they can't simply 'bypass' the process of coping with difficult physics of takeoff or landings.
Stall limiter is an individual option. It hurts your performance more than it helps. At the benefit of keeping you from spinning out and dropping a wing, you lose a great chunk of your ability to manuver your aircraft. Trust me, you can instantly tell. It feels like you've lost one of your elevators.
Auto takeoff is a wierd thing... It's a nice luxury to have, if you can't learn to take off for yourself, or if you're taking off in very heavy bombers, but for the most part it's more fun to take off for yourself, and gives you the ability to turn around after you pull gear up, to dodge vulchers, and do what you want.
Pretty irrelevant matter at hand.
All arguments that AH is arcade-ish don't hold up in my book. It's got a damned good set of laws for physics and interaction.
Yes, because you're biased against other games.
AH does have a good set of physics but it has its shortcomings. Unfortunately, people just refuse to acknowledge these shortcomings as shortcomings, and treat it as if it was either intentional or adequate, whereas they view other games dealing with such problems as "going overboard" or "unnecessary".
It's basically the same defensive mental reaction towards someone saying "I have a big noodle", by responding "you don't need a big noodle".
Heck, I considered the "hit bubble" of AH1 to be far far more arcade like than anything we have today. That's gone and the game is a million times more realistic (and fun!) for it.
The irony is many AH gamers hated it when the "hit resolution" was refined to what we have now, and that's not even half of it.
Many AH gamers hated the realistic cockpits,
they hated the new icon system,
they hated the new head position restrictions,
they hated the new GV armour modelling,
they hated the ack...
...and they hate every new change that brings AH somewhat closer to 'realistic' properties. They hate it for about a week and a half, and then get used to it, and forget they ever hated it at all.
This tells a lot about how AH gamers' brains are wired up when it comes to 'realism' discussions.
