HTC, for 1.07, can you please, PLEASE remove the inflight Radar?

[flakbait]

Ever read this thread about Radar?
 http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum9/HTML/001639.html

You should, since it effects all radar and not just in-flight stuff.


------------------------
Flakbait [Delta6]
Delta Six's Flight School
Put the P-61B in Aces High
"I wanted to go back for another 50 missions, but they ruled it out
because I had a case of malaria that kept recurring. So I had to stay
in the States and teach combat flying. I was shot down by a mosquito!"
Frank Hurlbut, P-38 pilot
 

[hblair]

Ok, guys who think we are idiots for not liking in-flight radar. Geniuses, tell me, Why is *not being able to find a fight* rarely (if ever) an issue over at warbirds?

?

Why?

No BS, No butt kissing, but a well thought out reason. Can you do it?

And try to do it without slamming warbirds, after all, that was HT and Pyro's baby.


Hooligan, no matter how much you warm up to lazs, he won't ever let you drive the healey.

[JimBear]

Always seemed to find good fights in beta before the dot dar was instituted. Seemed like you could actually have time for a dance.


JimBear

[hblair]

And don't say that wb's has different # bases, or bigger terrain, as that is adjustable per the terrain editor.  

Like I said, I'm not being critical of HTC, just kicking around thoughts here.

[lasse]

QUOTE:
Nobody wants realism in this game.. that is not fun.

AKDejaVu


In this matter you are seriously mistaken !!

Reading the replies to this thread, I still don't see any reason at all to keep the inflight radar.

------------------
 
The Wild Vikings
Commanding Officer
Lasse

[This message has been edited by lasse (edited 05-04-2001).]

[Mr. T]

 

Originally posted by lasse:

Reading the replies to this thread, I still don't see any reason at all to keep the inflight radar.

I see several reasons for having in flight bar radar at the very least.
-SW

[AKDejaVu]

 

Nobody wants realism in this game.. that is not fun.

AKDejaVu


In this matter you are seriously mistaken !!

Don't think so.  I do believe you are mistaking people who cite realism as a reason to change things as people who want things to be realistic.

AKDejaVu

[hblair]

SW, those reasons would be __________.

[This message has been edited by hblair (edited 05-04-2001).]

[Jayhawk]

 

Originally posted by AKDejaVu:

Of course, these people that are pounced on are always presenting well thought out, well represented and non-insulting posts.

DJV quite often they are not negitive and some are well thougth out and come from past experience and still they get beat down. Its just an overbering negitive attitude to any changes to the current way the game is. Without improvements or inovation things get stagnent. Humans are by nature resistant to change, but variety is the spice of life.

 

They never start with "HTC I QUIT IF YOU DON'T...." or "ANYONE THAT DOES THIS SUCKS" or "DO THIS NOW!" or simply decides to insult people before even presenting an argument.

Some do. Some present valid ideas. Some whine. We all know what area we fall into.
The poor victims of this game.
 

How about this... if people want to avoid hostile replies, try by avoiding inults in the very first sentance of the post.  That would be a really great place to start.

Agree 1000%

 

Then, try thinking a tad bit about what is being proposed and who it is making the game better for.

We will never know. The vocal minority rule.

 

As for the idea of turning off Radar for the sake of in flight realism.. I'm all for it.  ...Just as soon as we have pilots willing to patrol designated bases doing nothing but waiting for aircraft... with other pilots on standby in the tower waiting to relieve them when their patrol is done.

Nobody wants realism in this game.. that is not fun.

AKDejaVu

Read my 2nd post. I don't want to turn off the dar altogether. Just the inflight radar. Leave the tower radar alone. Your telling me you decide what base to fly from without looking at the tower dar? Most fights are found from the tower dar. The inflight dar provides no information about where a fight is, but does effect how the fight is carried out. The same info can be gleaned from the tower dar before you wheels up.

[Cobra]

 

Originally posted by AKDejaVu:
 
How about this... if people want to avoid hostile replies,  
AKDejaVu

Actually, why post a hostile reply at all?  Why not post a well-reasoned, counter-point to the original post (even if the post is ludicrous, outrageous, or a I Quit post)?

Why go to that level in the reply?  That I don't understand.

Blaming the original poster for one's own hostile reply is a bit of a stretch.

Cobra

[Hooligan]

hblair:

I've already driven the Healy.  Try not to make this event your entry into the ranks of the perpetually wrong  .

WB has a smaller map with fewer bases (meaning the action is closer and more concentrated) and only 2 sides (the enemy is never off fighting brand X), and most importantly you cannot shut down enemy fighter operations at an airbase so terribly easily.  To clarify, when I say "a fight" I mean a fight between friendly and enemy fighters.  It is not unusual to show up at an enemy base in AH and find a half dozen enemy osties as the only opposition.  This does not qualify as "a fight" for my purposes and never happens in WB for obvious reasons.

In-flight DAR is one of the big advantages AH has over WB both in playability and realism.  It would be a tragedy to get rid of it.

Hooligan

[Dago]

Seems I remember WB having a couple arrows, red and white.  Red pointed you towards enemy concentrations.  Does that still exist?

Dago

[hblair]

I hate doing this quote thing, but its the only way to answer your innacuracies <sp?>

 

Originally posted by Hooligan:
hblair:

I've already driven the Healy.  Try not to make this event your entry into the ranks of the perpetually wrong   .

Cool.

 

Originally posted by Hooligan:
WB has a smaller map with fewer bases (meaning the action is closer and more concentrated) and only 2 sides

Read above, map size is somewhat adjustable. Field numbers are very adjustable. No inflight 'dar was not an issue when I flew the main arena and there were four(4) countries.

 

Originally posted by Hooligan:
(the enemy is never off fighting brand X)

kinda like Acme? ?? Don't get this one  

 

Originally posted by Hooligan:
(and most importantly you cannot shut down enemy fighter operations at an airbase so terribly easily.

I concede your point. I agree, sometimes FH's get blasted right in the middle of a furball, by people not really wanting to grab a field.   Perhaps HT could make it where all 3 hangars at small and medium firlds have to be down before fighter ops are affected? Just a thought.

 

Originally posted by Hooligan:
hblair:

In-flight DAR is one of the big advantages AH has over WB both in playability and realism.  It would be a tragedy to get rid of it.

Hooligan

 

[Hooligan]

dago wrote:

 

Seems I remember WB having a couple arrows, red and white. Red pointed you towards enemy concentrations. Does that still exist?

In my recollection, these arrows pointed towards the center of the map 95% of the time.  I actually knew where the center of the map was without their assistance  .  I did find them generally useless.

hblair:

Number of colors aside, on a good night when I was playing WB there might be 200 players up of which 180 were in fighters.  These 180 fighters had 16 to 30 bases to fight over.   Currently in AH during peak times we have 220 players on, but probably less than 150 are in fighters because players are manning shipboard guns, driving tanks, PT boats, etc…  These fighters are distributed over about 55 bases that are generally farther apart than in WB.  What this all means is that fighter density is much less in AH than it was in WB:   probably something like 1/4th or less.  If AH had similar fighter density (i.e. 900 players in the current map, or a much smaller map with only 20 bases) it would no doubt be much easier to find fights.

Back to you original point:  It was much less hard to find a fight in WB due to higher fighter density and different base closure rules.  Of course the AH map could be condensed and that would change the situation, but the fact remains that the AH maps are larger and bases are more numerous and spread out than they were in WB.

Hooligan

[jihad]

It's gotten to the point that I automaticaly start bypassing those people's posts in any thread. Got to where what they say can pretty well be anticipated so it has lost any meaning to me.

Good post Mark. <S>

It only takes a bad apple or two to spoil the whole barrel.