IT IS NOT RADAR. IT IS AN INFORMATION SYSTEM.
HiTech himself said it's called radar (it's just not intended to simulate radar). It doesn't matter what it is. If the official term is radar, I'll call it radar, too.
If you prefer to call it differently than what the one single authority calls it, that's your choice.
"Woodbine Red Leader, bandits, thirty plus. Vector zero nine zero to intercept." - Radar Controller
"Woodbine Red Leader, I've got bandits! Thirty FWs ten miles east of Bumville at twenty thousand." - Fighter Pilot
"Coastwatch One, bandits, thirty plus. Heading 260, twenty thousand." - Ground Observer
That would be perfectly reasonable. As chat message (I think this was done somewhere, many ages ago, though probably not online), or more modern'ish as voice transmissions. Those differ from the "radar" (call it what you want) in that those don't give instantaneous low-level information. Information that cannot be used for the final approach (of final escape). The all-seeing edition and the current one show both one's self and the enemy with zero delay, and can be used as targetting computer, intercept/evasive maneuver planning down to the lowest level just above finally aiming the guns. Add altitude and 95% of the game can be played on the clipboard, like Elite can be played by looking at its radar. More like an RC plane, because the moving-map GPS we have doesn't rotate track up. But I fear track-up auto-center will be the next feature of the map (the only thing that protects as from that madness is that 1024x1024 may be a bit lowish resolution to look nice when rotated).
The 0-delay map removes things that need to be done (looking around). It removes alternative paths that can be taken (trying to stay out of harms way). It makes the uneventful flight more boring, and makes the overall game more boring by allowing fewer possible play styles.
Fighting is the problem. Which is odd coming from ccvi since he will stand in there and swing the bat.
Only if there is a reason to. I don't like to fight, or to kill. But I will if I have to, because we're at war. I understand that your point of view differs on this. You like to kill of fight just because.
If all the game had was a furball, I don't think I would still be here. No, I'm pretty sure I would never have gotten here. The description of a somewhat complex war, to be fought with tools that are somewhat hard to control sounded interesting (somewhat complex/hard from the point of view back then). Had the description been "counterstrike with planes", that would under no circumstances haven been sufficient to sign up for a monthly payment. A little CS-style furball doesn't require many players, and just hooking up some computers with friends was something that was interesting in the decade before finding AH, and it didn't come with a montly fee.
If something comes at a higher cost than alternatives, it has to offer something that doesn't exist elsewhere. Furball exists elswhere. Persistent worlds exist elsewhere. A "persistent furball" doesn't seem to make any kind of sense. A slim chance to win $500 doesn't look attractive either (there's enough offerings to drop your email here to win... and such sites often look more legit than the https-less hitechcreations.com). It needs to be something unique, that can't be had elsewhere. Because "elsewhere" intends to serve the majority to cover basically unlimited development efforts, whatever is here cannot just be unique, but will likely need to target an unusual audience (if it would be a normal audience, it would have already been served well by the bigger fish). Trying to compete with something usual, at lowish development costs, for a higher price than others - doomed.
It needs to be exotic. Extraordinary. An unusual kind of fun. It needs to be large-scale, cannot replicate at home. The individual fight is: Meaningless.
(Losing players within 10 minutes is probably a different issue - it's probably completely wrong expectations. What's wrong? The description, or the game?)
