I'm sure all of you could expand on the list. The thing is, AH would have been a flight sim if it had been introduced 20 years ago. In fact, when I first tried Warbirds offline in 1996 it wasn't just an air-combat game; compared to the standard of the day it was a high fidelity air-combat flight simulation. But AH is pretty much the same thing in a different sand-box, and 13 years have gone by...
I have not heard such and utter load of BS in a long time.
It never ceases to amaze me how people wish to pick and choose the items they wish to see, but them try use the argument of realism to justify there arguments. The simple fact is , there are many things about flying a plane that are not fun. Such is the fact of life. Simple things like flying for 250 hours and never seeing an enemy plane is very close to realistic. But I do not hear you saying it should be modeled.
Spending 2 hours planing before each flight is realistic, I do not hear you wanting it.
The simple fact of the mater is, You play a game, the game is Air combat. The terms simulation vs game are not in any way in conflict with each other, you wish to try separate the 2 terms, but you really can not.
Some simulators are made for real life training. These simulators are designed for a specific purpose in mind. AH is no different , it is a simulator with a specific purpose in mind, and one of those purposes is fun.
Some here wish to say IL2 is more realistic because it has you push a button to open cowl flaps? I say BS again. They just makes different choices at what it wishes to accomplish. They want you to believe it is realistic, but start looking into real details of how things work and you will see , they just are making you push a button.
Ah is designed to learn air combat. It strives to model planes perfectly in their flight envelopes so that the air combat is real. Please do a side by side of AH against any game on the market when it comes to flight dynamics.
HiTech
