Will Aces High have a padlock view

[Minotaur]

Tired Thread;

PADLOCK!!! (Scare anybody?)  (Make anyone Mad?)  

IMO, I know that Padlock has never really been done right, if at all, in any "Massively Multi-Player" envoirment.  Hence, just amounts to some form of "Game Concession".

Therefore; and hypothetically, NO ONE (including myself) can say wether they like or dislike Padlock in this type game......

At this stage, all anyone can say is wether they LIKE or DISLIKE the IDEA of Padlock in this type game.......

For myself, I occasionally like to look into the future (C. Columbus) and form ideas about what I might find out there on the other side of the ocean.  That does not guarantee I WILL always like what I find.  I am just not afraid to go looking.  I might just sink my ship and never come back (HAHA No such luck   ).

I have confidence that if anyone (Software Team) ever does Padlock right, they will be a team like HTC.  By that time, a NEW technology will probably have come out and make it obsolete anyway.

Please note, if someone does do it, and I don't like it. I might just express my opinion about that as well.  I might do it on a Forum much like this one.

"You have been Shotdown"
"You have been Killed"

Mino


[This message has been edited by Minotaur (edited 11-16-1999).]

[Shepard121]

Note: I accept from the post that HTC has decided not to implement a padlock, but the below quotes actually provide an interesting arguement for the actual concept of padlocking your target


Just a quick addition to this threat.  This was posted on combatsim.. the interview with Major General "Boots" Blesse:

We had a chance to talk to Boots about his experience flying the F4 in Vietnam as well as his experiences in Korea flying the F86 Sabre. One of the most astonishing facts came out as we listened to him talk about the "padlock" system. It turns out that the system was not in effect when Boots arrived in Vietnam, and that the Sabre squadrons were flying defensive.

 Not with Boots around! He quickly came to see how ineffective the tactics were, and Major Blesse soon developed new tactics. Whenever the flight LEAD spotted an enemy aircraft, he would never take his eyes off his target. Wouldn't that leave him vulnerable?

The system he worked out ensured safety for the padlocked pilot. When his wingman heard him call, "Baker lead, padlocked," he understood that the flight LEAD was now engaged, and it was his job as number TWO to ensure the safety of the engaged pilot. Number three and four similarly ensured the safety of the engaged element.


for the full article, go to http://www.combatsim.com

-Shep

[Razorback]

I think the best example of padlock being done correctly in an environment with more than 20 aircraft in the sky is Mig Alley.

The user enables the padlock on and aircraft he wants to engage and can disengage whenever he wants.  If the target moves away from possible head movement position then it disengages.

I thin the best system to impliment in an AH type sim would be a 3-9 line padlock.  You can maintain visual on a target that stays between your 12 o clock 3-9 line but once it passes that point you lose padlock.

Personally, I don't need padlock but I don't see how it could hurt to have the option.

RB

[Westy]

 A Vietnam airwar analogy? 30 years after the war in which aircraft we fly here in Aces High occured.

  Online sims don't force folks to fly as part of a dedicated and self protecting 'flight' that has 3 guys backing up the *one* who is the only one released to engage the enemy pilot. Thank Cod I'm not forced to fly in a flight every time I log on. I fly to dogfigh, not be someones aide and 6-watcher.
 
 Should you be able to get together 2, 3 or 4 guys then feel free to target fixate. I hope the others in the flight can keep do thier job of keeping your 6 clear because any pilot with half a sense can easily zoom thru and pick you off. Target fixated pilots stick out like a sore thumb <G>
 
 --Westy



[This message has been edited by Westy (edited 11-16-1999).]

[Shepard121]

IT's actually a Korean War analogy...about 14 years earlier.  

Besides, the basic rules of dogfighting apply no matter what era.  Speed is life..lose site, lose the fight.. etc..

More often than not, (even in Korea) Flights would break down to individual elements...the wingleader and wingman...  That's how I fly in Aces... I cover my wingman as best as I can, and he'll cover mine when the roles are reversed.

The important concept that I was trying to convey is that his tactic was to NEVER take his eyes off the target... his wingman was there to be his eyes in the sky... the wingleaders job was to kill the target... ASAP.

[Minotaur]

Sheppard;

Need a wingy?  Let me know.  I fly Bishops, fighting them dreaded Rocks mostly.

Mino

[Shepard121]

Mino,
What an unfortunate twist of fate!  I'm a Rook.  However, if ya wanna fly over on our team for a while, Wednesday night around 2100-2400 ET would be a good time.  We also use Battlecom for voice.  Contact me on radio channel 121 in Aces High for details.

Right now, I'm concentrating on honing my wingman skills... and learning from our more experienced prop pilots..they have a lot to teach.  Voice radio helps a LOT... because you can constantly keep your wingman apprised of the situation.

-Shep
-Shep

[-lynx-]

Mino - my point was that you can't "re-acquire your target instantly" which you seem to have been saying.

It's quite ironical but RL pilots scan the airspace around them in WB/AH snap view mode: acquire a sector, make sure it's safe - move your head the next sector etc. There should not be a "padlock style" wondering around - you'll miss that plane that's coming towards you at the same altitude otherwise...

p.s. Many people in AH/WB are RL pilots btw. I'm not as experienced a pilot as some here but I do have 30 hours of P1... And my claim to fame is that I had a SpitIX flying by ~200 feet below me when I was going on my first qualifying X-country   I was thrilled to bits to see it flying this close to _me_! Come to think of it - I'm still is  

------------------
-lynx-
13 Sqn RAF

[Shepard121]

Lynx,

You're right, they do scan the sky in sections... but once they aquire, they padlock that target and follow it with their eyes and head.

Sounds real cool about the Spit!  Were you looking at down 45 degree right? ;-)

-Shep

[Minotaur]

Lynx;

Thanks for your reply, I interpreted it as yet another brow beating.

I do not feel that you can instantly "re-aquire" or instantly "acquire" anything.  I do feel you can do this rapidly (a few moments).  I think that you can re-acquire easier (faster) if the time is short and you have a good idea where the object will be in relation to where it last was.

With more practice, or if your life was on the line, you would be pretty darn good at it.

Thanks again.  

BTW;

Quote: p.s. Many people in AH/WB are RL pilots btw. I'm not as experienced a pilot as some here but I do have 30 hours of P1... And my claim to fame is that I had a SpitIX flying by ~200 feet below me when I was going on my first qualifying X-country  I was thrilled to bits to see it flying this close to _me_! Come to think of it - I'm still is :End Quote

I bet you had that BABY, Padlocked.....  I know that I would have.  

Mino

[This message has been edited by Minotaur (edited 11-17-1999).]

[Sundog]

Padlock:
'The results of focusing full attention on one opponent to the exclusion of all else[Known as Padlocking]...'
Page 261 of 'Fighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering' Robert L. Shaw

Point 1: Padlock is as `Realistic' as snap views.

Point 2: HTC has pointed out that a real padlock is very hard to implement.

Question to HTC (Curiosity): You were refering to breaking padlock at the canopy rail. Having flown often before and tracked aircraft in flight, and never had any problems tracking an aircraft in flight as passed thru a canopy rail. As such, I realise you won't implement it in this game, but would it be possible to program a padlock such that `sill line' of the cockpit canopy forced the break in padlock, and not the braces. Upon reaching the sill line, the pilots head view would 'lock' as if holding `his/her' head in that position. upon reaquiring the `target' the view would have to be manually padlocked again, or refer back to `snap views'.

I have stated before that I like padlock for the realism. As such, since we will never have that, would it be possible to just put a pure panning contorl in the cockpit with or without snap views? Then adjust the rate at which the pilots `head' can pan based on the G's? I think that feature would quell all the arguments, since we would be able to manually padlock. (Is pure panning already implemented?) I also havent noticed, but does the G load effect the rate at which the `snap view' action happnes? If not, will a feature such as that be implemented?

Just reaching for the sky HTC. Thanks for the sim though. I know we are early in the beta, and I am already having a blast in this game.

[Sundog]

Ok, Ok, just read the early posts panning enabled...Man this really is a DEAD HORSE.
So how do I enable Panning? Help!!!!

[-kier-]

F8

[Flathat]

This is probably rather late to be jumping in, but...Mino, with all due respect I'm not sure I understand your center field analogy. Are you saying that in your view, padlock merely simulates "having some idea where the con goes so you can reacquire quickly?"

Here's why I'm a little confused...I've never flown a plance, but I have played center field.  

 

Example:
You are playing center outfield for baseball. The batter hits a high looper to left center. You have played up and must run a long distance to catch the ball.

You visually acquire the ball coming off the bat --> You brain computes the vector for intercept --> You take off running to that intercept piont, you are NOT looking at the ball while running --> You re-acquire the ball just before in impacts the ground and make a diving catch.

You did this all with no thought, as to which snap view you must use.

Ummm...You visually acquire the ball off the bat, you estimate an intercept vector, and you take off...but the absolute LAST thing you EVER do is take your eye off the ball. You take your eye off the ball, 99% of the time you'll blow the play. This is why you occasionally see outfielders collide, run into the wall, etc. They lose SA because they have to watch the ball all the way into the glove. Similarly, this is why you drop a ball when you lose it in the sun or against the roof of the Homerdome or something. You can't see it...you have to reacquire...oops too late.  

That being the case, padlock pretty much becomes what everyone says it is...a way to get the computer to help you keep your POV on a particular object. I have no opinion either way on whether it's a good thing or not. I've never used it, despite the fact that "losing SA" is my middle name.   Maybe we'll all be using VR headsets a decade from now.

Some of the shots taken at padlock advocates have been pretty harsh, though. Folks, is it really necessary to insult someone just to make a point?

------------------
Flathat
'Black Dahlia'
No10 RNAS "The Black Flight"
Angel on your wing, devil on your tail

[Curly]

"Folks, is it really necessary to insult someone just to make a point?"

 Absolutely.
 Someone has to provide conterbalance to all the Barneys in the world.