F3 view

[Ack-Ack]

The same could easily be said about IL2 drivers and their planes 




If anyone here thinks F3 view is not a "MAJOR and UNREALISTIC" enhancement to the performance possibilties of these aircraft, than they are lying for fear of losing F3 not wanting their advantage taken away or they're NUTS   

It's easy to see who is who in these posts! 

Again, make it so you cannot shoot in F3 view! Simple and effective 

Widewing was spot on in his comments.  F3 will only help your SA but it's not going to improve your skill or gunnery.  If you're a crappy pilot to begin with, F3 isn't going to magically make you an experten, you're still gonna suck.  The only difference is with F3, you'll be able to have a really good view of that other guy whipping your arse.


ack-ack

[Rich46yo]

The same could easily be said about IL2 drivers and their planes 

If anyone here thinks F3 view is not a "MAJOR and UNREALISTIC" enhancement to the performance possibilties of these aircraft, than they are lying for fear of losing F3 not wanting their advantage taken away or they're NUTS   

It's easy to see who is who in these posts! 

Again, make it so you cannot shoot in F3 view! Simple and effective 

Its very easy to tell. For instance I can tell you almost never fly bombers and I dont even need to check your stats.

Thats what gets me about these F3 whine threads. The ones who start them, and support them, never fly bombers and simply want killing bombers to be made easier for them. They cry about F3 being unrealistic but thats the bottom line. They simply want to be able to kill them easier. After all its not easy developing the bomber hunting skills of players like Lusche so why not take the easy route and just get rid of F3?

Funny at how little you see the JU-88 attacking GVs even tho the actual bird was more then capable of making precise dive bomb runs, "as many 2 engined attack bombers could". The reason for that is because little johnnie adds up the bombload of a JU-88 compared to a Lanc-stuka ,X 3, and he has 14X 3 1,000lb bombs to chuck at flak and tanks. Little Johnnie, after all, can count to 21 and 14 1,000lb bombs is a Lanc-stuka dweebs wet dream. I bet if we ever got B-29s you'd see the same ones tossing 20 X 3 of em out when diving on GVs from 2,000'.

Change the flight model. 4 engined bombers should not be allowed to be used that way.

As far as F3 stands there is balance in the bomber war as long as the bombers are flown as they historically were. Pirouetting 3 Lancs around cyber space as fast as you can type .speed 150/.speed 300 isn't realistic and is dweebery in the extreme. To go out and do it, and then come here crying about F3, is just as dweeby. Especially when your a guy who never flys bombers no-how.

Even with F3 we got guys that can slice and dice any 3 bombers, and bomber sticks, in the game. So if they can do it why cant you?

[shreck]

Even with F3 we got guys that can slice and dice any 3 bombers, and bomber sticks, in the game. So if they can do it why cant you?

Hmm, I certainly have little problem with killing bombers, unless 999 is involved! You still fail to see my point so I'll try again! You are absolutely correct that I very rarely if ever fly bombers. Sooooooo with that said, how can I up ju88s, il2, A20, d3, sbd, boston etc. and make many many folks look out-right silly! Hell I turn fought a zeke for 3 miutes in TT the other day in a ju88 and lost only cause I augered with one engine out<--from a picking spit" BTW who I caused to auger shortly there after!
My rant is NOT about bombers!!!!!!!! It is merely about F3 view making it possible for certain twin eng. and single eng. planes to more or less compete in an environement they should not be able to! The main purpose for ALL the aircraft mentioned was for ground attack either strategic or tactical, they were designed optimally for their time to perform these tasks NOT compete with fighters (that were designed to KILL other planes) in a swirling, turning dogfight.
   So again I'll sum up, I very rarely fly the planes mentioned! So how can I ( a mediocre cartoon pilot at best ) compete with far superior aircraft in a furball? The answer is simple---> F3 view! It's that simple, It's like flyin the 80's version of atari 1942   
   The SUPERIOR advantage to a persons situational awareness while in F3 view is unmistakable! For a game such as Aces High ( which obviously prides itself in accuracy and historical flavor) to allow such an "ARCADE" feel to part of it's product is astonishing to me!
  F3 view for lumbering 4 eng. bombers is an obvious fix for defense, But F3 view in the mentioned planes is used for OFFENSE! There is your difference  Maybe that is the crux of the matter!

[Ack-Ack]

As been stated, using F3 isn't going to increase your skills.  If you suck, you're still gonna suck if you use F3.


ack-ack

[Widewing]

I'm pretty confident that during such manouvres the crew is far more concerned with "holding on to ANYTHING" so they weren't flopping around the fuselage than peeking out there gun holes and accurately directing the pilot as to specific threats and specific locations! I would think the crew and the communication would be pretty much useless under these manouvring instances! 

Not at all.... I have over 3,000 hours in Navy aircraft as a crewmember, and logged quite a bit of time in TA-4Js. It gets a bit tough trying to clear your six while under heavy g loading, but you have a job to do and you do it. I could track adversaries despite hard maneuvering. It's just extremely tiring.

BTDT


My regards,

Widewing

[uptown]

I need F3 mode so I can drool at me sexy pony as I fly around the map. 

[Anaxogoras]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned how F3 makes it easier to spot tanks and other gv's.

[Widewing]

We've discussed this idea before.  Let the normal view keys give you the gunners' view, but with the ability to still control the aircraft.

Won't work... People have enough trouble flying facing forward....


My regards,

Widewing

[Widewing]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned how F3 makes it easier to spot tanks and other gv's.

So? What's the point? You have a four man crew, all of whom are scanning the ground for targets.

Ever fly a SAR (search and rescue)? You have guys hanging out of windows looking for rafts or guys floating in the sea. See something, tell the pilot via ICS and direct him to the sighting...

Listen folks, unless you have actually crewed a multi-place military aircraft, you're mostly yakking out of your respective butts.


My regards,

Widewing

[Rich46yo]

Shreck the point "I" was making was that a game policy, or rule, or view, or whatever isnt inherently/automatically dweebish when a player uses it in a dweebish manner. Its the play of the player their ownselves that make it dweebish.

If you got rid of F3 views many would stop even flying bombers, maybe even quit the game. It would be impossable to fly the bomber and fight the guns effectivly without it. If your in a gunners seat your only going to be able to use rudders no matter what the view rules are.

[mechanic]

Won't work... People have enough trouble flying facing forward....

most of us are pretty proficient at it actualy, though i'm not saying i support having a gunner view as a six view

[Anaxogoras]

This is a big, fat ad hominem:

Listen folks, unless you have actually crewed a multi-place military aircraft, you're mostly yakking out of your respective butts.

And this is a big, fat red herring:

Won't work... People have enough trouble flying facing forward....

I don't know why you're resorting to non-logical persuasion.  How a floating eyeball is anything like crewing a multi-place military aircraft is yet to be explained.

[AWwrgwy]

From a post by Swoop:

'Corkscrewing' was the most effective way of making the Lanc hard to hit. It involved throwing the aircraft into a sharp, diving turn out of the fighter's gunsight, then pulling sharply up in the opposite direction.

From a post by Zigrat

"The target was partially covered by cloud when we got there, but we could see the ground target indicators laid by the Pathfinders, and were able to bomb them accurately. The sky was bright with fire and explosions as we closed our bomb doors, and with our load lightened, we turned for home with a great sense of elation. Suddenly, the mid-upper gunner shouted over the intercom "Corkscrew port!" As I threw our lancaster into the initial diving turn  i felt the thud of cannon shell in the port wing and the shudder and noise as both my gunners fired back. After a few violent corkscrew manouvers all went quiet. I took a breath and mid-upper reported that he thought he had hit the Ju-88 which he had seen spiral away."

Flg Off Michael Beetham, No 50 Sqn, Skellinthorpe, 1943

www.ww2aircraft.net:

Sunderland vs. eight Ju 88's

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There were 11 crewmen on board the Sunderland, including nine Australians and two British. The crew was on an anti-submarine patrol and also searching for remains of BOAC Flight 777, an airliner that had left Gibraltar the day before and subsequently had been shot down over the Bay of Biscay.

In the late afternoon, one of the crew spotted the eight Ju 88s. Bombs and depth charges were dumped while the pilot, Walker, "redlined" the engines. Two Ju 88s made passes at the flying boat, one from each side, scoring hits while the Sunderland went through wild "corkscrew" evasive manoeuvres. The fighters managed to knock out one engine. On the third pass of the fighters, the top-turret gunner managed to shoot one down. Another Ju 88 disabled the tail turret but the next fighter that made a pass was bracketed by the top and nose turrets and shot down as well.

Still another fighter attacked, smashing the Sunderland's radio gear, wounding most of the crew in varying degrees and mortally wounding one of the side gunners. A Ju 88 tried to attack from the rear but the tail turret gunner had managed to regain some control over the turret and shot it down. The surviving fighters pressed home their attacks despite the losses. The nose gunner damaged one of the fighters and set one of its engines on fire. Two more of the attackers were also hit and the other two finally disengaged and departed. Luftwaffe records indicate these were the only two that made it back to base.

The Sunderland was a wreck. The crew threw everything they could overboard and nursed the aircraft back to the Cornish coast where Walker managed to land and beach it. The crew waded ashore, carrying their dead comrade, while the surf broke the Sunderland up. Walker received the Distinguished Service Order and several of the other crew received medals as well. Walker went on to a ground job while the rest of the crew was given a new Sunderland. That Sunderland and its crew disappeared without a trace over the Bay of Biscay two months later after reporting by radio that they were under attack by six Ju 88s.

wrongway

[Widewing]

This is a big, fat ad hominem:

And this is a big, fat red herring:

I don't know why you're resorting to non-logical persuasion.  How a floating eyeball is anything like crewing a multi-place military aircraft is yet to be explained.

LOLOL You guys want to severely limit the vision of multi-place aircraft, but no one making this argument has any real concept of what can be seen from the real thing. No one understands that multiple sets of eyes are scanning the sky at the same moment.

Therefore, since you have no experience in these types of aircraft. Your reference is solely that of the game, right? You have no point of reference, no hands on.

How do you code the view from every crew station at the same time?

Answer: You can't.

Ever take a ride in a B-25? Virtually every angle is covered by at least one crew station. Every crew member can report what he sees, all at the same time. You can't readily code that any other way but as it is currently done. The closest you could get is to severely limit zoom out, leaving the aircraft itself as an obstacle to vision, and that still limits you to one set of eyes from one position at any given time. Inasmuch as the combined crew can see just about every angle and all at the same time, F3 is not an unreasonable replication of that.


My regards,

Widewing

[shreck]

LOLOL You guys want to severely limit the vision of multi-place aircraft, but no one making this argument has any real concept of what can be seen from the real thing. No one understands that multiple sets of eyes are scanning the sky at the same moment.

Therefore, since you have no experience in these types of aircraft. Your reference is solely that of the game, right? You have no point of reference, no hands on.

How do you code the view from every crew station at the same time?

Answer: You can't.

Ever take a ride in a B-25? Virtually every angle is covered by at least one crew station. Every crew member can report what he sees, all at the same time. You can't readily code that any other way but as it is currently done. The closest you could get is to severely limit zoom out, leaving the aircraft itself as an obstacle to vision, and that still limits you to one set of eyes from one position at any given time. Inasmuch as the combined crew can see just about every angle and all at the same time, F3 is not an unreasonable replication of that.


My regards,

Widewing

True enough I guess, still it would be a plus to make fwd firing guns operable ONLY from the pilots seat!