FeedBack on new Arena

[F4UDOA]

Gents,

This is not a flame or even a squeak. It's just feedback as the forum says. This statement really concerns me about the new arena.

Once your a 1st you will the loose 150 for a death and recieve 10 carreer points for mission successes. If you reach 0 your back to 2nd or 1000 your promoted. Along with a promtion comes better ground crews. So your guns might jam less,eng run better, but your expected perform a lot better. There's also medals and other stuff.

This is a problem for these reasons.

Not all aircraft are created equal. Having a Pratt and Whitney overheat as much as a Merlin is not historically accurate under any circumstance. Nor would the realiabilty of a NIK2 compared to a Hellcat. The two are simply not in the same league.

Likewise a M2 .50 cal should not jam as much as a  20mill Hispano. Also gun jamming is not the same in all birds. A P-51B had sideways mounted guns that jammed under G load. The F4U had 6 dynamically charged .50cals that rarely jammed and cleared quickly when they did. This is simply the facts of war. Even Pappy Boyington never had a dedicated A/C so nobody had a preffered ride. It simply was not that way in the Marine Squads. Maybe in the AAF, RAF or Luftwaffe. Also the Navy had an outsanding maintenance record throughout the war. You can't change history for parity.

If you want a REAL Realistic gameplay arena use the following criteria.

ENGINE MANAGMENT. If someone runs above Max continous power for longer than allowed then the engine overheats. Also implement real fuel managment. The fuel duration of the LA-7 and BF-109 are way out of line. Make player use fuel management by increasing the fuel burn multiplier.

If you want realism stick to facts not random events. Just my opinion.

[Pongo]

HT never said anything about how he would accertain or represent the reliability of engines or armement. Yet you complain that its not fair to US aircraft.
thats a whine.

Any game that tried to simulate the reliablilty or ww2 aircraft engines and didnt give the fully developed PW radials a better reliablility then some of the other engines wouldnt be much a simulation. Would it.

Heres the non whining version of your post

Im glad to hear that HT will be including engine and armement reliablility in Aces High: Blah. This will greatly benifit planes like the Hellcat against planes like the Niki and the 109G10 and the me262 and probably the La7 as well. It will also benifit mg151/20 armed fighters vs Hispano armed fighters. It brings a refreshing new angle to the differences between these planes.


As far as randomness. We allready have it with crash to desk tops and discos and the qualitly of our enemies conects. All of which effect our score but we have no control over.

[J_A_B]

This "mission arena" isn't going to be totally accurate anyway since it's a pretty safe bet that the fighter guys flying P-38's or P-51's aren't going to have to sit through 8-hour-long missons like the pilots of history had to.

I think of this "mission arena" as HTC's way of dealing with the number one complaint of boxed gamers when they try an online flightsim (no structured missions/campaign mode).

J_A_B

[Kweassa]

F4UDOA?? Where are you getting your quotes from??
 
 This is the first time I've ever heard about such issues

[Wotan]

It does sound a bit whiney but there is a "point" to what your saying. But you overlook to much for it to be a real concern.

The engs dont "overheat" in AH. Its just eyecandy to simulate wep running out. All that happens is wep shuts off. You wont see f6fs and f4us in a western europe theater. On allied planes the engs "cool" quicker then on axis planes. 5 min wep 5 min cool.

We dont have the planes available to do any sort of "good pac set up. So until we get the planes we need and have a chance to compare them theres nothing to "whine" about.

Now the 1st set up in the MT will be an 8th force run. But if you end up matching d11s, p38ls and p51bs against our ah g6 then thats not "historically correct". Our g6 is the earliest version.

We have a 44 b17g a 44 jug a 44 p38l. The lw has the a5 a8 and g6. At altitude where most missions will be flown the allies have a performance advantage even without wep. I nmot whining here I expect it to be fun.

I dunno know what ht has planned but its premature to begin criticizing something when we dont know the details.

Gunjams will only be problem if they happen all the time. The idea that all your guns will jam at the same time doesnt make sense. So you may loose 1 hispano or 1 50 cal. You then can decide to to abort the mission or continue. It may not represent true "realism" but its more immerssive then "fly till ya die in the main".

Performances issues mostly effect top speed and the allies would have a clear speed advantage in most setup given the current planeset. If wep were historically modelled the axis would have the advantage.

I guess what I am saying is until ht gives more info theres not enough facts to make a good judgement.

I dont suspect the MT to appeal to everyone. But I like the idea behind it. I hope it has the potential to give the same type of immersion that a good il2 coop can give.

I do expect the mt to appeal more to a squad level. Even missions against ai alone maybe a bad idea.

The main will always be there. Didja read about better graphics

Kweassa read the thread by hts about naming the mt. Its all there.

[APDrone]

Kawasea,

Aces High BB > General Forums > Aces High General Discussion > Need a Name.


<.S>

[F4UDOA]

JAB,

Actually your point about P-38 and P-51 pilots is a good one. But easily simulated by proper use of the Fuel multiplier. This should also affect the duration of flight for the intercepting 109's and 190's would be needed as well. I think this "simulates" reality much better than a random gun jam or engine failure/lost performance.

Wotan,

I know this is premature to complain before we see the product. However the way it has been presented does not sound logical or tempting. And I know there are better alternatives for modeling of such an arena. So better to get it out now than wait.

And BTW, there were some F4U's and F6F's in Western Europe.

Pongo,

HT did not say that a P&W would be more reliable than a rice burner. What he said is that it would be based on ground crews. That is just a little to vague for my taste.

[Wotan]

And BTW, there were some F4U's and F6F's in Western Europe

not in an 8th airforce setup, if we see f4us escorting b17s to berlin I'll quit, again



I will admit I whinced at the idea of of better performing planes and less gunjams with rank but as long as it doesnt overwhelm the experience then its fine with me.

[Shiva]

Originally posted by Wotan
You wont see f6fs and f4us in a western europe theater.

The British got 252 F6F-3s, 930 F6F-5s,  95 'birdcage' canopy F4U-1s, 510 bubble-canopy F4U-1s, 430 F3A-1s (F4U-1s produced by Brewster), and 977 FG-1s (F4U-1s produced by Goodyear) as part of the Lend-Lease program. As a matter of fact, it was the British who first demonstrated that the Corsair could be reliably operated from a carrier; Navy concerns about the visibility over the long nose had kept the Corsair restricted to land-based use.

[Wotan]

Read what you quoted me as saying. Did I say they werent there or that we wont see (as a part of a set up) them there.

I appreciate the history lesson but its not necessary.

To make a good set up you something that has depth. Like an 8th airforce set up, bob, rubarbs and circuses etc. For the life of me I dont see where any of those include the f6f or f4u.

[F4UDOA]

Wotan,

I would luv to have seen F6F's and F4U's escorting B-17's over Germany. I never understood why the Allies didn't take advantage of this capability from there carriers during the war in 43 and 44.

I actually read about operation "Danny" which was F4U-1's loaded with TinyTim 11.75" rockets to take out V-1 sites in France. The task group was in training when the project was cancelled. Gen. George Marshall ended it because "He didn't want any Marine Aviators flying in his war". So much for inter service co-operation.

[Wotan]

yup the f6f and the f4u would have fit well in the eto.

I am not to familiar with the range of the f6f and f4u but you figure if operated in ther pacific ocean it shouldf have decent range.

The VVS ever get any f6fs or F4us?

[F4UDOA]

Not during WW2.

Maybe they captured one during Korea?

The Soviets should have been aware of the F4U. In the late 1940's a F4U-4B shot down a Russian TU-2 that got to close to the Fleet.

They were also involved in another incedent in 1954 off the Korean coast with a couple of La-7's and AD-1's. Don't know if they were Russian, Chinese or Korean.

[Nwbie]

HiTech

This has got to make your day
The game isn't even out yet and they are finding bugs with it already....lol


NwBie

[Hawklore]

WOTAN where at in Jacksonville do you live?