AH direction & competiton

[Kats]

Lets face it, ww2ol is going to be very attractive to alot of flyers. Regardless if your not interested in anything but flying, the chance to use your AC in a historical combat enviroment will be very appealing.

AH strategy is to concentrate on the flying aspect of the game and hopefully offer something more for the "flyboys" than the competition simply because they hope to be more focused. Sounds fine.

I notice  that AH is now adding ground vehicles, so there seems to be an interest now on their part to to add the ground war to the flavor and enhance the air to ground aspect of combat.

Well, IMO they might be missing a good opportunity. YOu see ww2ol will be using real players for the ground war, which is great. The only thing is that this comes with it's compromises. What AH can do is model an AI ground war that is affected by the air war (supply, trains, bridges, infantry and armour lines) IE an AI moving front based on the effectiveness of the air campaign.

What's the difference? Well, the ground war can be modelled in proper ratio's based on average attendance, for eg, you wont' have 100 soldiers vs 100 pilots etc etc.

IMO this sticks with their strategy of of AC first but also puts it in a more historical combat enviroment and provides a serious alternative to ww2ol. Both philosphies will have their merits and their place in the market.

[Ripsnort]

Kats, your post in AGW and here have always been fair, precise and to the point, <S>

In regards to your topic, I think that both will find their respective "market shares", although I plan to be in both WW2 Online and AH.

I've noticed ALOT of very young people(say, 15 and under) that also will be  there, that is not to say that it will change the game, but it might have  a 'different' community in the long run than one that has been established over the last 10 years ala AW-DOS/WB's/AH.  Nothing wrong with that, WW2 online will draw more than AH I believe, but to me , bigger is not always better.  There are some fine young warriors in this game, Duma and Beefcake come to mind.

Personally, I can easily see myself dividing my time between both, assuming that WW2 Online is good.

Things  I don't see in the future: A pay AW, where I think it will be a game strictly as part of a network membership service.

I see WB's going by the same direction as AW,  even with the release of WB3.0...assuming that WW2 Online has a good  flight model, and strat.

It's a very good time to be an online flight sim fanatic, IMO.  So many options in the future, so little time!

------------------
Ripsnort(-rip1-)
~GeschwaderKommodore~I./JG2~Richthofen~[/i]
CLICK>> JG2 "Richthofen"
Panzer Group Afrika~15th Panzer Division~[/i]
CLICK>> 15th Panzer Division
   
Too often, we lose sight of life's simple pleasures.  Remember, when
someone annoys you it takes 42 muscles in your face to frown, BUT, it
only takes 4 muscles to extend your arm, grasp the joystick button,
and shoot the sucker down!



[This message has been edited by Ripsnort (edited 05-19-2000).]

[miko2d]

 All we hear about WW2OL is just promises and nice pictures of things that will happen all at once.
 I am not saying that they will not do what they promice, but by that time do you know if AH will not have the same features?

 Why wait two years for a game with planes, tanks and strat if you can release a game with planes in 6 month, add tanks 6 month later, then add strat, mission planning, terrain editing, etc., improving/fixing the existing features all the time? Unless you have more then enough programmers and can do all the parts of the game simultaneously, gradual approach is the way to go.
 miko--

[indian]

WWIIonline sopund like fun but think anout this It starts very early in the war and when do the planes you want to fly come out, how fast will the war progress. I like the idea of an AI ground war, it doesnt even have to be real moving vehicles and troops or could be like the fleets in WB on a randome course to fight an enemy. tanks in long colums that once in range fan out and attack either a tank colum or a base. Then we are forced to look for and destroy these targets. Maybe there could be something coded in that once a pilot flys low enough over a tank or infantry  the host sends a message from HQ that enemy sighted at so and so location.

------------------
Tommy (INDIAN) Toon
  1st Aces High Trainer Corps.
Home of The Allied Fighter Wing A.F.W.
A.F.W. Homepage

[Kats]

There's a multitude of different ways you can model an AI ground war and strategic implications. I have my own ideas on this as well.

The point being, and AI ground war has just as many merits as a human controlled ground war and I see a market for both.

PS that mission waypoint feature on the clipboard is really a fantastic idea. It's going to add to AH playablity, and squads missions more than I think we realize.

[This message has been edited by Kats (edited 05-19-2000).]

[bloom25]

It's also important to remember that AH has been in playable form for about 10 months now.  Look how far we have come in just that short time!  Although WWIIonline promises to be great, they aren't even in beta yet.  AH on the other hand is to the point where the basic engine is in place and new features are added every month or so.  How long do you figure it will take WWIIonline to even work the bugs out before they can do the same?  AH will be a total war simulator eventually as well, but with an emphasis on aircraft.  (For me, that is what I want.)  IMO there is room both of these excellent sims when WWII comes out.  Not only that, but new features added in one will eventually be reflected in some way in the other.  This is good for us, the consumer, in that we get the best game possible.

Just my quick $.02.



------------------
bloom25
THUNDERBIRDS

[funked]

Kats, I agree.

Games like Falcon and Longbow provide an AI ground war that is more than adequate.  In fact the AI in those games is a lot better than the players driving tanks here!

But as a fighter-puke, I say, "Targets is targets!"

Doesn't matter to me who's driving them.