Author Topic: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable  (Read 24391 times)

Offline Brooke

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15462
      • http://www.electraforge.com/brooke/
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #15 on: January 13, 2024, 01:36:36 PM »
Consider how you guys feel about multiplayer online play vs. single player offline play.

If folks were debating some wrinkle of offline single-player play, you would wonder why they care at all and aren't playing multiplayer.  Because multiplayer is a whole higher realm of play and enjoyment compared to offline single player.

That's the same distance I feel between scenarios and regular multiplayer.

But when I talk to people who have never tried scenarios, it often feels like this.  "Hey, how about for dinner an aged prime ribeye steak, grilled asparagus, baked potato smothered in butter, Caesar salad, a glass of wine, Gulf shrimp cocktail, and for desert fresh-baked apple pie and homemade ice cream?"  And the reply is, "Nah.  I like my McDonald's cheeseburger."  Me:  "OK, but how about just trying it?"  Reply:  "Nah.  I'm good."

It mystifies me because, to me, scenarios are the greatest, and no other type of game play comes even remotely close.

Offline Dadtallica

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1294
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #16 on: January 13, 2024, 02:59:19 PM »
Here is a recent interaction I had on Reddit as I try and recruit people to AH. It’s not easy lol.

Not sure how the steam player count was calculated but 17 all time is not helping.

Back in 2022 after a loooooong break from 2010. Old name Ratpack, same for the BBS.

Squad I did the most tours with were the Excaliburs then The 172nd Rabid Dogs. Still trying to talk Illigaf, Coola, Oldman22, and Joecrow into coming back instead of being boring old farts!

Offline Bruv119

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15644
      • http://www.thefewsquadron.co.uk
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #17 on: January 13, 2024, 03:27:19 PM »
DCS is awesome,
AH is still awesome fun
IL2 sucks  (just imo)

I can't decide where I want to spend the little time I do have to fly.   Spent big on a new machine and VR is the next step.   Will most likely continue to pop into both just to get a handle on it.  DCS updates and new stuff is glacial they have so much to do and so few to get it done.   The realism and challenge is what is so satisfying.
The Few ***
F.P.H

Offline edge12674

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 405
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #18 on: January 14, 2024, 09:29:33 AM »
It mystifies me because, to me, scenarios are the greatest, and no other type of game play comes even remotely close.

Scenarios along with Monday Night Madness, FSO, and the WWI year end party are where the best remaining game play is to be found.  Unfortunately, these are only available a few days a month, they are also suffering a decline in numbers, and require you to adjust your playtime schedule (kind of like watching TV before VCR's).  I endured the poor game play in the MA for years thanks to these events.

For a flight sim to flourish with today's consumers it needs a good public multiplayer base, a good private multiplayer capability(PVP and PVE), good/varied single player experiences, and of course VR. 

VR is more important to flight sims than any other sim genre.  The ability to have depth perception can not be over emphasized. 


TShark
"If you are alone and meet a lone Zero, run like hell...You're outnumbered" - Joe Foss USMC 26 kills

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11975
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #19 on: January 14, 2024, 10:13:47 AM »
I agree that the depth perception provided by VR is a game changer. I bought one of the original Rifts. It was awesome but just not clear enough to read instruments in DCS. I eventually gave up on it and then tired a Quest 2. Was disappointed in the small "sweet spot" and gave up on it. Having played sims for decades in 2D on a flat screen I learned to adjust. I can air refuel most or all of the aircraft capable in DCS without VR. Have heard some say they could never have learned to do it without VR. Brother who is new to PC sims says he wouldn't fly them without VR. As of now, VR isn't in my simming future.
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.

Offline GasTeddy

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 973
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #20 on: January 14, 2024, 10:58:51 AM »

To me, IL-2 is better in some ways and AH is better in some ways. I love the realism of IL-2 and the stakes that seem a bit higher.


Same here. I somehow got kind of fed up with flying and IL-2 offers many realistic arenas for tanking. I fly here and there as well now and then and manual control coolers is not so big thing.
The Mad   CatMan!

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17591
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #21 on: January 14, 2024, 11:36:03 AM »
Here is a post stating how an IL2 server is loaded with players at peak time...less than 60 total

[ Invalid YouTube link ]

Eagler

"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | EVGA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti FTW3 | Vive Pro | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder Pedals

Offline The Fugitive

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17611
      • Fugi's Aces Help
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #22 on: January 14, 2024, 12:37:20 PM »
Scenarios along with Monday Night Madness, FSO, and the WWI year end party are where the best remaining game play is to be found.  Unfortunately, these are only available a few days a month, they are also suffering a decline in numbers, and require you to adjust your playtime schedule (kind of like watching TV before VCR's).  I endured the poor game play in the MA for years thanks to these events.

For a flight sim to flourish with today's consumers it needs a good public multiplayer base, a good private multiplayer capability(PVP and PVE), good/varied single player experiences, and of course VR. 

VR is more important to flight sims than any other sim genre.  The ability to have depth perception can not be over emphasized.

I think this is one of the things where AH is sold short. You read comments like this and say, "Too bad, this was a fun game in the old days" and players move on.

There isnt anything wrong with what TShark said, but if you didnt know him you wouldnt know that he is posting totally from the point of view of a fighter. AH has so many more aspects to the game than just fighters. There are a dozen different ways to play AH.

Last night (Saturday Jan 13, prime time eastern US) we were running in the mid 140s for players. We were on a mid sized map. There were at least 3 GV fights going on the Bish fronts, three bases under attack with air support , one Bish group running missions and attacking and getting bases back. In this there were supply runs to bring capture bases back up, there were long range attack on depots, there was even an NOE sneak grab with a single guy!. Later a furball developed after the Bish had captured another base which raged on for a good half hour. Was a lot of fun for a game thats dying.

I think it depends on what your looking for in a game. To me DCS and IL2 are too fighter specific. AH gives you fighters but also so much more. Some comments have been posted that those other game are looking for a B17 to be added. Well ya, intercepting bombers or protecting bombers are a major part of a fighters mission profile but it is total ignore to this point in them. If all you want to do is fly around with pretty graphics and a million buttons to activate MicroSoft Flight Sim is for you. If you want pretty graphics, engine management and the occasional fight in a small number of fighter types DCS is for you, and so on.

To me AH is the richer, fuller game over all.

Offline CptTrips

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7788
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #23 on: January 14, 2024, 01:53:00 PM »
To me AH is the richer, fuller game over all.

Fair enough.  AH has it's own pros and cons like any game.  However, does the market agree with you?

Selection bias.  Asking a bunch of players who have stayed in AH 15-20 years if they think AH is the best, well, of course many are going to say AH is the best because that is why they are still here.

The more illuminating question would be what did the 600 nightly players that use to be here, and left,  think?
What did the 40,000 players that downloaded the trial during the Steam launch,  and declined to subscribe, think?

If the goal is just to keep the players already here, then ignore that.  If you want to add more players, simply asking the players already here, and swear they will never leave, isn't very productive if you want to understand where the game is failing to attract.

I suspect the goal is to keep the remaining players and ride them into the sunset and not worry about what would be needed to reverse the numbers trend.  I think the loss rate has shallowed compared to years past and demographic mortality is the main source of attrition.  That's not an unreasonable strategy given the circumstances.  Just keep releasing skin batches and fix any major breaking bugs that crop up and don't sweat it. 

IMHO, organic growth has never been AH's strong suit.  I think most of it's early growth came from the collapse of competing MP games and picking up their refugees.  I suspect the number of players that come to AH brand new not having been a AW, FA, WB, WWIIOL refugee is fairly small.  That well has pretty much dried up.  No more low hanging fruit. 

One possible opportunity might be if IL2 starts to stumble now that the main driver Jason Williams has left the franchise.  It is unclear to me if the population is going to embrace Korea as a replacement for WWII in the new upcoming product.  If they feel WWII is being put on the back burner, they might consider moving to AH.  But I think the subscription model, weaker graphics and lack of engine management will create resistance to that cross-over.  Even though WWII centric, they might feel AH is stepping down a notch.  However I do think AH has a superior massively-multiplayer server implementation. 

Combat pilot is going to be interesting to watch, but it might be 5-8 years before they have a full MP solution.  Many a slip between cup and lip.  A lot can occur in 5-8 years so it is no guarantee that it will even ship at this point too early to guess.

DCS has given WWII very little focus (so far).  Their warbirds are very, very nice IMHO.  I spent all yesterday playing with them offline.   A fully fleshed out DCS WWII offering would be astounding.  DCS has the industry momentum, hype and revenue now to actually get development done instead of withering on the vine.  The DCS CEO is supposed to be a closet WWII fanatic and has piloted many of the remaining warbirds (it must be nice to be rich).  If they see IL2 faltering, they may decide it is time to pounce and capture that market share. Wags himself has mentioned that eventually they are running thin on compelling modern jets they can implement due to security constraints.  Up until now there was no reason to try and directly compete against IL2 when they could make plenty of money on modern jet and rotary.  If IL2 starts to stumble with Williams gone and they are running out of jets that are worth implementing, they may decide to move on to the next greenfield ripe for take-over, i.e. WWII.  Several WWII airframes are already in the pipeline and Wags has made some vague side references to unannounced WWII projects.

It's an interesting horse race.  I really don't know if IL2 players would move to AH in it's current form.  If they are looking to leave because they see a lack of WWII development, they might not see AH as any better, certainly not enough to justify a monthly subscription that would be worth the cost of two GB versions every year with nothing owned to show for it.  Some might just stay and run over the same ground until they drop like AH's remaining base.  Some might move to DCS because they don't want to step down in fidelity.

Maybe it all ends up in a bifurcated market.  WT for all the casual pilots and DCS for the simulation level combat pilots.  With Combat Pilot being the wildcard we will have to wait years more to form a solid opinion of.


Quote
"It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future." - Niels Bohr

Shrug. 


« Last Edit: January 14, 2024, 03:54:29 PM by CptTrips »
Toxic, psychotic, self-aggrandizing drama queens simply aren't worth me spending my time on.

Offline edge12674

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 405
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #24 on: January 14, 2024, 02:11:55 PM »
Point well taken Fugitive  :salute

I have always preferred games that focus on being a simulated fighter pilot.  I reluctantly operating buffs and GVs when my squad or side needed it.  I feel that AH lost a lot of its aviation focus when GVs became more mainstream.  For me buffs are there to protect or attack and I have no real desire to operate them.

As a player operated "total battlefield game", I think AH is hands down the leader.  For more realistic ground operations I think IL-2 or DCS does a better job.

There is the possibility within the next few months for interest in WWII aviation to increase dramatically with the "Masters of the Air" series.  Flight sim makers should be ready to take advantage of this. 

DCS and MSFS did this with "Top Gun Maverick" by selling module combo packs, missions, and liveries.  If you watch the DCS "2024 and Beyond" YouTube video, it looks like they might be doing the same for a WWII aviation popularity surge (if it occurs). 

I would love it if HiTech Creations also stood ready to take advantage of this by updating and advertising.  Sadly, I think HT is content to just "leave the lights on" until AH can no longer covers its operating costs.

« Last Edit: January 14, 2024, 02:20:20 PM by edge12674 »

TShark
"If you are alone and meet a lone Zero, run like hell...You're outnumbered" - Joe Foss USMC 26 kills

Offline DmonSlyr

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6302
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #25 on: January 14, 2024, 02:29:49 PM »
AH provides a lot of dynamic action. I love the large war aspect of it. The strategy of winning a map over a day or few days. Many times fighting in new areas of the map. The CV battles are exceptionally fun. It's very challenging which I like but I imagine pretty tough for people who are just learning air combat, especially having to pay 15 a month for where the real action is.

The special events are also why I still love AH. Combat Challenge, FSO, Scenarios, are very realistic and extremely intense and engaging. There is nothing else like it.

I look at it this way. If I log into AH and don't see any fights or action on a huge map I don't like, I just go play DCS. No point in IL2 as I'd rather learn the more realistic sim. I didnt really care for IL2 either. AH is a little more gamey but I love the flight model. Where all planes have easily identified strengths and weaknesses. Especially not being able to fly in chase mode. I like how you have to take off and take the time to get alt and E and be patient. It's not air spawn easy mode.  I think AH provides the best mix of action and battles along with a flight model that mostly makes sense, besides those damn Yaks!
« Last Edit: January 14, 2024, 02:31:39 PM by DmonSlyr »
The Damned(est. 1988)
-=Army of Muppets=-
2014 & 2018 KoTH ToC Champion

Offline Dadtallica

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1294
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #26 on: January 14, 2024, 03:16:08 PM »
besides those damn Yaks!

They’re so small! Pretty sure I’ve never hit one.
Back in 2022 after a loooooong break from 2010. Old name Ratpack, same for the BBS.

Squad I did the most tours with were the Excaliburs then The 172nd Rabid Dogs. Still trying to talk Illigaf, Coola, Oldman22, and Joecrow into coming back instead of being boring old farts!

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11975
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #27 on: January 14, 2024, 05:10:38 PM »
Especially not being able to fly in chase mode.

In DCS you can turn off external views, labels(icons), and no icons in the map view. This can be set for the mission in the mission editor to control what all players can and can't do. Many multiplayer servers are going to turn those "cheats" off.
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.

Offline xanax

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 199
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #28 on: January 14, 2024, 06:32:43 PM »
Fair enough.  AH has it's own pros and cons like any game.  However, does the market agree with you?

Selection bias.  Asking a bunch of players who have stayed in AH 15-20 years if they think AH is the best, well, of course many are going to say AH is the best because that is why they are still here.

The more illuminating question would be what did the 600 nightly players that use to be here, and left,  think?
What did the 40,000 players that downloaded the trial during the Steam launch,  and declined to subscribe, think?

If the goal is just to keep the players already here......................... ............................. ....................<snip>



Very informative and insightful, thanks.
The Damned
Founded 1988

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11975
Re: Simulated Aerial Combat Roundtable
« Reply #29 on: January 14, 2024, 07:57:13 PM »
Hitech will survive beyond AH. He knew how to coad before Brandon recommended it.
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.