PDA

View Full Version : Anyone Else Concerned About Long Flight Times?



LuckyBoy1
09-02-2004, 01:10 PM
A review of the game I read talks about how there will be very long distances to travel across faceless water to get to a target area or see any action. This does not confront me in the least, but I am concerned the developers will not get rewarded the way they should if the dull, impatient crowd can't wiz into the fighting in less than 30 seconds. Any thoughts on this?

Now with an actual index & more fiber! It is newer & and even more improved! It's Luckyboy's Guide For Complete Users!...

http://www.airwarfare.com/tech/tech_lbguide.htm#001%20Security%20Issues

Luckyboy = Senior hydraulic landing gear designer for the P-11 & Contributing Editor to Complete Users magazine.

LuckyBoy1
09-02-2004, 01:10 PM
A review of the game I read talks about how there will be very long distances to travel across faceless water to get to a target area or see any action. This does not confront me in the least, but I am concerned the developers will not get rewarded the way they should if the dull, impatient crowd can't wiz into the fighting in less than 30 seconds. Any thoughts on this?

Now with an actual index & more fiber! It is newer & and even more improved! It's Luckyboy's Guide For Complete Users!...

http://www.airwarfare.com/tech/tech_lbguide.htm#001%20Security%20Issues

Luckyboy = Senior hydraulic landing gear designer for the P-11 & Contributing Editor to Complete Users magazine.

Fennec_P
09-02-2004, 01:23 PM
People will do what they do now for long flights.

Time compression for offline, airstarts for online. Or dispense with these both and make fictitious scenarios.

Resident_Jock
09-02-2004, 01:23 PM
Step 1: Press "A"
Step 2: Press "]" a few times
Step 3: Scan for enemy contact
Step 4: Enemy found! Hurry and press "[" a couple times!
Step 5: Shoot stuff down! Whoopie!
Step 6: Repeat steps 1 and 2. Press "[" a couple times when your carrier shows up
Step 7: Botch the landing, clip the conning tower and slide on your roof into the ocean.
Step 8: Hit "Esc" and then refly.
Step 9: Repeat steps 1-8 for approx 4-6 hours.
Step 10: Complain to oleg that carriers are overmodelled and to nerf the arrestor cable FM's.

http://thecasualty.homestead.com/files/resident_siggy.jpg

SKULLS_Exec01
09-02-2004, 01:25 PM
Well let them go to the DF rooms for fast combat.
Sure there will be some like that, but as you can see by all the squadrons lining up for PF, I think most look forward to the larger map areas then what we have right now on AEP.

I personally I'am looking forward to flying at least an hour to a target and if I survive, an hour or so back with all the possible dangers that might include along the way!!

http://members.dslextreme.com/users/skulls/images/Sigs/skulls_sig-Exec01A.gif (http://skulls98.tk)
SKULLS_Exec
CO of The SKULLS Squadron

arcadeace
09-02-2004, 01:44 PM
Takeoffs, landings, flying the new a/c and attacking enemy fleets along with some island action is what will draw me to PF. But "]" and "[" will be very important.

Baco-ECV56
09-02-2004, 02:12 PM
Concerened? Nope actually quiet eaguer to fly over the Pacific. I am allready buying Shark repelents and Have a very good Lifesaver http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

I ussually have some coffe handy when flying FB/AEP, I guess all I´ll have to do is make some more coffe than ussual for PF flights.

And as stated, the quick action guys will have lots of custom made short missions the next day PF hits the stores, and you always have DF servers.

Going with the larger maps is the way to go to please both crowds.

JR_Greenhorn
09-02-2004, 02:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Baco-ECV56:
Going with the larger maps is the way to go to please both crowds.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Agreed.
I often wonder why so many here strongly oppose things they don't agree with, but need not affect their gameplay.

On the other hand, I do hope there is a nice selection of small and large maps. I play FB on a lower-end computer, so I use mostly the online-sized maps as they run much smoother for me. Large expances of water shouldn't bother much, but I hope we also get selections of small and large mainland-type maps also.

http://www.fargoairmuseum.org/F2G-1D.jpg

rpkiller
09-02-2004, 02:29 PM
I've posted this before but here's a feature I'd like a lot that's extremely easy to implement: Especially with 16x and possibly even 32x compression promised for PF, reducing the compresson speed before the AI has totally screwed up your attack plan or already engaged the enemy will require pretty quick reactions. How about either an auto pause or auto reduce time compression once within - say 8km or 10km of an enemy. That way one still has to look for the enemy & prepare to peel off & attack or whatever.
Cmon guys, please show some support for my idea this time round http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

VW-IceFire
09-02-2004, 02:32 PM
I'm worried.

Hopefully they hvae a solution.

A 16X compressor would do!

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RAF No 92 Squadron
"Either fight or die"

Gato__Loco
09-02-2004, 06:26 PM
I hear ya, rpkiller. Good idea!!!


______________________________
GatoLoco
Gato_Loco
Gato__Loco....
Ubi.com keeps deleting my accounts!! Counter back to 1... sight!
______________________________

tagTaken2
09-02-2004, 11:01 PM
Demand warp. I don't use autopilot and time squashing often as I frequently want to fly in another direction, and even with 32x... you'd need a very steady hand on the stick.

stansdds
09-03-2004, 05:51 AM
I must admit that I use either time compression and autopilot or warp to the next waypoint or engagement in combat flight sims. I know it is far more realistic to glue myself to my chair and fly for 20, 30, 40, 90 minutes and see nothing but my wingmen or the bombers we are escorting, then fight for 10 or 15 minutes, then fly the return trip, land tired and bored, but I don't have that kind of time to waste.

Jieitai_Tsunami
09-03-2004, 06:11 AM
I've been flying Target Rabaul and the maps in that game are much bigger and take alot more time than any in IL2.

They do use some thing called a 'disengaging ring' because you fly for 20 minutes to an airbase and then don't feel like flying all the way back http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

So you just follow a course and it says '12thIJN_Tsunami has disengaged' about half the way back http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. This is not the same in all maps though and some coops take at least 2 hours to get there and back..

http://www.jieitai.bravehost.com/http://www.jieitai.bravehost.com/Images/Main%20logo.jpg

Tully__
09-03-2004, 06:24 AM
I'm looking forward to long navigation legs, that's what kept me in CFS2 longer than 2 missions. For those that don't have the patience, I'm sure mission designers will have a lot of shorter options available very quickly after release (or even before if missions remain compatable across versions like the did between Sturmovik & FB).

=================================================


http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/sig.jpg

Tully's X-45 profile (SST drivers) (http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/fb.zip)

Salut
Tully

Tully__
09-03-2004, 06:26 AM
In fact, a further extreme, I once flew an 8 hour mission realtime in EAW ..... just because I could http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

=================================================


http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/sig.jpg

Tully's X-45 profile (SST drivers) (http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/fb.zip)

Salut
Tully

SKULLS Virga
09-03-2004, 02:56 PM
"In fact, a further extreme, I once flew an 8 hour mission realtime in EAW ..... just because I could"

Gatorade bottle at your desk?

http://img68.photobucket.com/albums/v206/SKULLS_Virga/Signature_2.jpg

SKULLS_Exec01
09-03-2004, 03:33 PM
"I'm looking forward to long navigation legs, that's what kept me in CFS2 longer than 2 missions."
Yep, me also my friend!!

http://members.dslextreme.com/users/skulls/images/Sigs/skulls_sig-Exec01A.gif (http://skulls98.tk)
SKULLS_Exec
CO of The SKULLS Squadron

Baco-ECV56
09-03-2004, 03:34 PM
Yeap I also did some looooogn escort trips withe EAW, taking off from Britain Flying half way into Germany and back... It is very inmersive to do that on line. Off-line yes I agree quite boring.

But is a lot of fun to be talking al calm and cozy when BAM, somebody shouts Bandits 11 o´clock HI...
Of course if somebody is even scaning the skys after a 1 houre flight http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif...

But I fly simulators to try and replicate the problems and workload that real pilots had, and engaging the enemy bouncing you after a long uneventful fligth is one of tjose problems real life WWII pilots had to face... Al cramped, bored, tired and you have to react in a nick of a time.

yes I call that inmersion. Maybe a hi priced inmersio (timewise) but a lot of fun for me.

Also the long returns ensure that you do nurse your wounded bird, since you need it to hold till you can at least se yur base...

With short return flight you don´t have to care much about your engine failing, just gain altitude and come in for a glide landing http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

Done it lots of times in FB.

LEXX_Luthor
09-03-2004, 06:16 PM
Long distance flying will appeal to the militant radical fundamentalist flight simmers. 30km dogfight maps will appeal to the 25 Percent simmers -- you know the 25% fuel thing for 30km dogfighting.

__________________
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A ...in Aces Expansion Pack ( AEP )

"You will still have FB , you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
:
"Damn.....Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

VMF-214_HaVoK
09-03-2004, 07:05 PM
Personally I dont mind long flight times. In a way it adds to the immersion factor for me.

=S=

http://www.flightsuits.com/images/patches/patch_vmf214a.jpg
http://www.flightjournal.com/images/plane_profiles/corsair/c.jpg
www.vmf-214.net (http://www.vmf-214.net)
(The Original BlackSheep Squadron of IL-2/FB/AEP/PF)

VMF-214_Pappy
09-03-2004, 07:59 PM
I like long flight times rather than low altitude weedwhacking furballs. Long flights allow us p47 and p51 pilots to gain altitude, and same to come with hellcat and corsair. So no it dont bother me at all.

http://www.flightjournal.com/images/plane_profiles/corsair/history.jpg

www.vmf-214.net (http://www.vmf-214.net)
Semper Fi
(The Original BlackSheep Squadron of IL-2/FB/AEP/PF)

Dammerung
09-03-2004, 11:19 PM
In IL-2, I've always used Autopilot/Time Compression, but In Lock on, I never did that...

Main Reason, even the most basic Aircraft in Lock On, the Su-25 is easier to Navigate than in IL-2. And plus, getting those Needles Crossed and holding it within 10 Meters of the Assigned Flight Altitude is VERY, VERY fun, especially when looking down at Strelas to the right and left and laughing at them because I'm right on my Flight path, and just outside of their launch range. Keeps me occupied. Now, some say I could be a wingman, but I SUCK at flying formation- It's just as hard for a leader to stay 100% on course though, but for some reason I'm good at it. I'll do a "real" flight in PF to see if I like it, who knows, I just might.

Oh, there are no fighter pilots down in hell...
Oh, there are no fighter pilots down in hell...
The whole damn place is full of queers, navigators, and bombadiers...
Oh, there are no fighter pilots down in hell...

Tully__
09-03-2004, 11:43 PM
While I see your point about keeping the instruments lined up in the modern aircraft sims, I find it more challenging (and more rewarding when I get it right) arriving at the target by ded reckoning and a bit of pilotage. Getting within visual range of your target after 300-600km/h of unaided navigation is very rewarding. Doing it by autopilot or "skip to next action" just isn't the same http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

=================================================


http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/sig.jpg

Tully's X-45 profile (SST drivers) (http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/fb.zip)

Salut
Tully

ElAurens
09-04-2004, 06:09 AM
There will be something for everyone in PF. The offliners will be able to simulate many famous battles, the onliners will have their DF rooms, the arcade flyers will, well who cares anyway? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

And remember, not all the maps will be set around huge expanses of open ocean. New Guinea will have several fields relatively close to one another. And Rangoon should have some enemy bases no more than 100 or so miles away. Maybe some closer ones as well.

Nothing to worry about.

_____________________________

http://www.blitzpigs.com/forum/images/avatars/Curtiss_logo.gif

BlitzPig_EL

LuckyBoy1
09-04-2004, 12:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
Personally I dont mind long flight times. In a way it adds to the immersion factor for me.

=S=



<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I was immersed once. It was back at the ranch when I slipped and fell in the feedlot!

Man oh man, you eggheads are kidding yourself if you think this game will sell with those long flight times and no optionbs to get around it. If it don't sell, UBI won't continue to support it and then you'll be where? Probably standing around lying to yourselves like you are in this thread.

Now with an actual index & more fiber! It is newer & and even more improved! It's Luckyboy's Guide For Complete Users!...

http://www.airwarfare.com/tech/tech_lbguide.htm#001%20Security%20Issues

Luckyboy = Senior hydraulic landing gear designer for the P-11 & Contributing Editor to Complete Users magazine.

AlexDavies
09-04-2004, 12:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tully__:
I once flew an 8 hour mission

=================================================


http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/sig.jpg

http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/fb.zip

Salut
Tully<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v37/T_O_A_D/alexcopy.jpg

Latico
09-04-2004, 12:40 PM
I find it rather humerous that we demand to have the greatest amount of realistic "emersion" that can be packed into this game, but yet some whine when the possibility of true realistic "emersion", such as long flight times, are braught up in discussion.

I may not have the time always to participate in a 3 or 4 hour combat mission, but I would like to have the option to do so. The ***igue and boredom factor is definitely a realistic "emerssion".

I have no doubt that custon mission builders will provide online and offline missions that will suit everyone. And the time compression feature will always be an option.

Snootles
09-04-2004, 02:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Man oh man, you eggheads are kidding yourself if you think this game will sell with those long flight times and no optionbs to get around it. If it don't sell, UBI won't continue to support it and then you'll be where? Probably standing around lying to yourselves like you are in this thread.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Whatever happened to air-starts?

LuckyBoy1
09-04-2004, 04:30 PM
Air start?! Stone the heretic!!!

Now with an actual index & more fiber! It is newer & and even more improved! It's Luckyboy's Guide For Complete Users!...

http://www.airwarfare.com/tech/tech_lbguide.htm#001%20Security%20Issues

Luckyboy = Senior hydraulic landing gear designer for the P-11 & Contributing Editor to Complete Users magazine.

Dammerung
09-04-2004, 06:18 PM
But Tully, at least for me, I find it even more satisfying to point and laugh at Strelas along my flight path that are a mere 100 Meters out of Range because i'm dead on course. Fun Fun Fun...

Oh, there are no fighter pilots down in hell...
Oh, there are no fighter pilots down in hell...
The whole damn place is full of queers, navigators, and bombadiers...
Oh, there are no fighter pilots down in hell...

Tully__
09-04-2004, 08:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LuckyBoy1:
Man oh man, you eggheads are kidding yourself if you think this game will sell with those long flight times and no optionbs to get around it. If it don't sell, UBI won't continue to support it and then you'll be where? Probably standing around lying to yourselves like you are in this thread.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No no no LB, we're not saying that at all... what we're saying is that the option for long flights is an additional reason for eggheads like us to buy it! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

As I mentioned in an earlier post in this thread, there are sure to be plenty of shorter missions available, but we "eggheads" don't mind the prospect of longer missions, in fact we find the prospect attractive. As in FB there is always the option to run your campaign with "Instant Mission Success" turned off and simply ESC and Apply right at the start of the mission if it looks like it's going to take too long http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

=================================================


http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/sig.jpg

Tully's X-45 profile (SST drivers) (http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/fb.zip)

Salut
Tully

Tully__
09-04-2004, 08:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dammerung:
But Tully, at least for me, I find it even more satisfying to point and laugh at Strelas along my flight path that are a mere 100 Meters out of Range because i'm dead on course. Fun Fun Fun...

Oh, there are no fighter pilots down in hell...
Oh, there are no fighter pilots down in hell...
The whole damn place is full of queers, navigators, and bombadiers...
Oh, there are no fighter pilots down in hell...
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

=================================================


http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/sig.jpg

Tully's X-45 profile (SST drivers) (http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/fb.zip)

Salut
Tully

Pentallion
09-04-2004, 09:23 PM
Iron Skies: Malta! is using the FinGulf map for the Med. All the airbases are set to actual distances from Malta to Sicily and we have some pretty long flight times in some of our missions. SubHunt and Recon missions can last quite a while.

We are planning (and recruiting for) Iron Skies: Rising Sun when PF comes out. There will be some LONG flight times in that online war.
If you think hunting down carriers and then launching strikes using realistic distances/tactics sounds like your squads cup of tea, then check us out at www.ironskies.net/ (http://www.ironskies.net/)

Just be ready to navigate without the map icon on.

Yellonet
09-05-2004, 08:19 AM
Big maps... YES! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif


- Yellonet

FA_Maddog
09-05-2004, 09:27 AM
Big maps??? An hour or two to target???? LMAO 90% of most people get lost on what we have now. I will bet right now there will be NO server on line that will host a hour long mission after the first try, why? because most will fail to find the target or will be so bored they will just quit. Ten to twenty minutes is a very long time to target in this game, that my friends is the way it is.

weasel75
09-05-2004, 05:21 PM
I am concerned about long flight times. But I dont see this as a problem http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

In FB our squad did some "full-real" night-flights with bad visibility just to test the navigational skills (keeping the needles in place). That can be fun.
But after a while its just plain boring. And just looking down at the sea does not help (in FB you had at least some cities or stuff).
Aircrafts would also need a much more stable trim, because in FB you can hardly ever relax, not to speak of going to the fridge/rest-room/etc.. and when flying for 3+ hours you may wish to leave the joystick just for some minutes.

So if the long-flight-option is in, fine, but most players will never try it, or just try it a limited time.

Online some more frustrating factors are to deal with:
1) you need good teamwork to stay together (once lost, the chances are low)
2) virtual pilots are just human, you cant be sure that nobody will get distracted or interupted by RL issues (yes, sometimes there is a RL http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )
3) connections can get lost, servers can go down, etc .. and after flying 2 hours to your target the server is going down (or deadlock, reset, etc) .. no fun

Looking at the typical DF-map for FB I doubt that we will have long oversea flights for DF. For COOP it may be nice, but as said above, a lot of frustrating factors hidden there.

The vast majority will prefer faster gameplay anyway, since there is a difference between RL-pilots and VL-pilots: RL-pilots do that flying for a living and therefore can effort to spend such a long time in the cockpit.....

RAAF_Edin
09-05-2004, 08:20 PM
I will like realistic flight time to the target and back... navigation and all the "whistles' that come with it http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

--------------------------------------
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif
Edin "Kuky" Kulelija
No76 Squadron RAAF

Swivet
09-06-2004, 12:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Resident_Jock:
Step 1: Press "A"
Step 2: Press "]" a few times
Step 3: Scan for enemy contact
Step 4: Enemy found! Hurry and press "[" a couple times!
Step 5: Shoot stuff down! Whoopie!
Step 6: Repeat steps 1 and 2. Press "[" a couple times when your carrier shows up
Step 7: Botch the landing, clip the conning tower and slide on your roof into the ocean.
Step 8: Hit "Esc" and then refly.
Step 9: Repeat steps 1-8 for approx 4-6 hours.
Step 10: Complain to oleg that carriers are overmodelled and to nerf the arrestor cable FM's.

http://thecasualty.homestead.com/files/resident_siggy.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LMAO,that sums that up in a nutshell. Or what i do is hit "auto" go down watch some tv,have a cig,or a drink,,,come back up,,check my coordinates clicks "]" a few times,,speed it up a bit, repeat steps 1,2,3....especially the drinking part.......haha

w\/é"*

initjust
09-06-2004, 01:01 AM
If PF does not have the option for long flights over real world geography and allow for the need to do real world navigation calculations taking wind drift, mag deviation, air density and other factors that are required in real world, real time navigation it will hold no interest for me at all.

I know that will cause no one any concern and I only post here to illustrate that there are a few like me that place as much, or more, value on the tasks and effort required to get to and from a target area than we do on the relatively small percentage of the total mission time that MIGHT have been spent in combat.

I have no trouble at all flying a mission that is several hours long and never even see an enemy AC. There is a great challenge in just getting to and from safely.

For me the interest lies in the total WWII PTO flight experience not just the combat.

That means doing the required nav calcs, flying the long boring flight segments, carefully scanning the sky for possible bandits never knowing if there are any even in the area, doing fuel management to ensure that you will have enough fuel to get back, adjusting the nav calcs on the fly as a result of combat or changing mission objectives or needing to adjust because the carrier/TF has had to make an unplanned course change for whatever reason.

Boring? Certainly if you have no interest in this dimension of simulating the WWII PTO experience.

However, for me and the guys I fly with this is absolutely critical for any game to be classified as a simulator or to be interesting.

After all, during WWII in the PTO there were probably more pilots lost due to nav errors, lack of fuel and other flight related challenges than there were lost to combat action.

The option to have all of this must be included in PF or it will not be interesting for me.

I know this will not cause any one any heart burn, nor should it, but there are some of us who have a much deeper interest in what happened in the PTO and what was required as far as navigation and pilotage skills just to survive that go beyond the actual combat that took place.

weasel75
09-06-2004, 01:30 AM
Drift, wind, map navigation, etc .. maybe thats a task for a flight-only-sim as M$ FS2004 or X-Plane?
I dont like the M$ FM, but the IFR part kept me flying the sim (of flying the Cessna over long distances without GPS).
IL-2/FB (PF?) have clearly a way better FM and DM, but concentrate on the fighting aspect ....

But maybe we get a nice suprise http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

initjust
09-06-2004, 02:14 AM
The IL2 series does seem to concentrate on the combat aspect but why not include the options for the rest of the total experience for those that have an interest in it?

After all, if a pilot in the PTO during WWII couldn't navigate well enough to get to the target area and home again how would he be able to engage in any combat or attack or live to fly another mission?

To ignore, or not include, the challenges of getting there and back seems to me that it is leaving out a great deal of what was required to fly, fight and survive in the PTO.

B1izard
09-06-2004, 02:19 AM
The solution to long flights is Carriers placed near islands or each other for those not wanting to fly long distances.

Pentallion
09-06-2004, 03:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FA_Maddog:
Big maps??? An hour or two to target???? LMAO 90% of most people get lost on what we have now. I will bet right now there will be NO server on line that will host a hour long mission after the first try, why? because most will fail to find the target or will be so bored they will just quit. Ten to twenty minutes is a very long time to target in this game, that my friends is the way it is.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not true. Today, for instance, we just flew an Axis attack on a British convoy heading to Egypt. About 150km to target. The British left Malta and had about the same distance to reach the convoy to protect it. Took half an hour to FIND the convoy as neither side knew its exact location. And we fly without map icons over almost all water. Though the Axis had some CR42's leave Pantellaria and get there in 15 minutes, which gave them an advantage finding the fleet.
We had a tense flight there watching for enemy planes the whole way. Some 109's jumped us from behind having gone south from Sicily to cut us off from Malta.
At the convoy site a huge battle took place with Stuka's diving on ships, torpedo bombers coming in, G-50's and Hurricanes buzzing around. I chased a torpedo bomber in my Hurricane and couldn't catch it in time before it dropped its torp. Fortunately, he missed.

Then the survivors had to make it ALL the way home. If you were leaking fuel or had taken some damage it was a tense ride back. I was out of ammo and there were still enemy planes about so I didn't relax till I had cleared the area. Even then, I was on the lookout for any remaining 109's that might be off hunting stragglers.

When players get back to base from one of those missions they feel like they accomplished something.

We'll be flying yet another Iron Skies mission soon. We've been flying them for months now. This is the second Iron Skies war and both wars had missions lasting an hour on average.

MK2aw
09-06-2004, 10:16 AM
RPkiller , I support your idea. It's the way I remeber AOTP,AOE and Red Baron use to work. It would automatically kick you out of time compression before engagement.

MK2aw

FA_Maddog
09-06-2004, 05:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pentallion:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FA_Maddog:
Big maps??? An hour or two to target???? LMAO 90% of most people get lost on what we have now. I will bet right now there will be NO server on line that will host a hour long mission after the first try, why? because most will fail to find the target or will be so bored they will just quit. Ten to twenty minutes is a very long time to target in this game, that my friends is the way it is.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not true. Today, for instance, we just flew an Axis attack on a British convoy heading to Egypt. About 150km to target. The British left Malta and had about the same distance to reach the convoy to protect it. Took half an hour to FIND the convoy as neither side knew its exact location. And we fly without map icons over almost all water. Though the Axis had some CR42's leave Pantellaria and get there in 15 minutes, which gave them an advantage finding the fleet.
We had a tense flight there watching for enemy planes the whole way. Some 109's jumped us from behind having gone south from Sicily to cut us off from Malta.
At the convoy site a huge battle took place with Stuka's diving on ships, torpedo bombers coming in, G-50's and Hurricanes buzzing around. I chased a torpedo bomber in my Hurricane and couldn't catch it in time before it dropped its torp. Fortunately, he missed.

Then the survivors had to make it ALL the way home. If you were leaking fuel or had taken some damage it was a tense ride back. I was out of ammo and there were still enemy planes about so I didn't relax till I had cleared the area. Even then, I was on the lookout for any remaining 109's that might be off hunting stragglers.

When players get back to base from one of those missions they feel like they accomplished something.

We'll be flying yet another Iron Skies mission soon. We've been flying them for months now. This is the second Iron Skies war and both wars had missions lasting an hour on average.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Big difference in a long mission that lasted only a hour total as you stated above and a two to four hour or longer mission that some said they wanted. I maybe wrong, they may be some servers that host them, but I don't think for long.

Dagger_3
09-06-2004, 10:07 PM
Once in FB, I, (or rather the autopiolet) flew from Helsinki to Leningrad/St. Peatersburg at somwhere arount 250-300 km/h in a He-111. needless to say, it could get kinda boring looking at water along time, and it was long enogh on 8x speed. in PF, I would expect at least a 32x warp, witch would make a 6 hour mission about 10 minuets. Besides, with the currant plane set, its worth it, and it's a nice break from all the senceless violence. And if your too impationt for that, then hel*, that's why god created the quik mission builder. Amen. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif

VF-3Thunderboy
09-06-2004, 10:21 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=26310365&m=624008707

YOu guys need to lookat this post! With a proper plotting board,it wont be so boring when you can look down on your map and see where you are. With the carriers online would move! that would be a trick!

initjust
09-06-2004, 11:51 PM
Some will like being able to do long flights and some won't. Some will actually do long flights and some won't.

I just flew a mission of about 300nm. With only the following info to go on so the first thing I needed to do was to work the nav calcs and plan my flight.

Essex posit - 295nm bearing 310? from Midway.
Speed - 30kts.
Course - zig zag course of +/-30? from her base course of 60?. 40mins between zig and zag turns.
Surface wind - 20kts from 60?
Winds aloft - 45kts from 282?.
Angle of Declination - East 9.3?.
Flight altitude to be 10,000'.
ISA Standard Day conditions.
Time constraint - must find and land on Essex 1.5hrs +/- 5mins after take off from Midway.

For PF to be interesting to me it will need to allow for all of the above flight parameters and conditions.

necrobaron
09-07-2004, 12:15 AM
I don't mind the possibility of long flight times, but I'm desperately hoping they have an option for warping and/or 50x time compression or somesuch. I'm all for realism, but since I have a life, I don't always have the time to sit behind a computer for 3 hours looking at nothing but water, have a 15 minute dogfight, and then another 3 hours of water on the way back.

"Not all who wander are lost."

olaleier
09-07-2004, 12:41 AM
The maps won't be any larger than the largest maps in FB.

==================================
http://img2.photobucket.com/albums/v30/olaleier/cobrasig.jpg
==================================
Marvin in hyperlobby

ElAurens
09-07-2004, 05:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by initjust:

Essex posit - 295nm bearing 310? from Midway.
Speed - 30kts.
Course - zig zag course of +/-30? from her base course of 60?. 40mins between zig and zag turns.
Surface wind - 20kts from 60?
Winds aloft - 45kts from 282?.
Angle of Declination - East 9.3?.
Flight altitude to be 10,000'.
ISA Standard Day conditions.
Time constraint - must find and land on Essex 1.5hrs +/- 5mins after take off from Midway.

For PF to be interesting to me it will need to allow for all of the above flight parameters and conditions.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I will promise you that less than 1% of all players will bother with such intricate navigation more than once. And the % of those online will be even less. Not that it should not be in the game mind you, because there are those with the time, patience, and knowledge to do so, but lets face the facts here. The vast majority of us are NOT pilots, and never will be. And if adding these complicated navigational features keeps even one aircraft off the flyable list, it is not worth it.

I personally would much rather see the time spent on making carriers mobile in the DF arena.

_____________________________

http://www.blitzpigs.com/forum/images/avatars/Curtiss_logo.gif

BlitzPig_EL

initjust
09-07-2004, 08:22 AM
You may be right. There may not be many interested in this level of immersion but I know that there will also be some who really want to be able to immerse themselves to this degree.

If PF does not allow for this level of immersion it will not really be able to claim that it is a PTO 'simulation'. Game perhaps but not a simulation.

I agree with you regarding moving carrier in DF arena. If PF does not allow for moving carriers for DF games that will truly be a very significant shortcoming if that is not possible.

As for having a mountian of flyable AC I tend to disagree. There needs to be an 'adequate' number of flyable AC but at some point I believe this becomes a marketing ploy or chest thumping point.

I would prefer to see fewer flyables in exchange for content that would really allow PF to be classified as a simulator. After all, how many flyables are really needed? Sure, to begin with, everyone will rush to fly every AC there is but then the novelty will wear off and everyone will settle on a hand full of AC that they will concentrate on and become proficient in and I would be surprised if that list isn't fairly short and be the more popular AC types.

How many of the multitude of flyables in the IL2 series are really used with any consistency?

Sure, there may be a small % of people who will fly some obscure variant because it holds some facination for them but the majority of players will settle on the more popular, well known types and, ultimately, there will be long list of AC of which a very small number ever really get used on a regular basis.

I'm not sure how much effort it would be to include the stuff required to allow for real world, real time navigation in PF.

The first three parameters of the flight I mentioned are covered by being able to have, and control, moving ships. If PF doesn't allow for this then it will not even be worth the time required to install it.

Being able to have wind in a game that claims to simulate flight (whether it is for the purpose of air combat or any other purpose) is a pretty basic requirement. It should have been in the IL2 series from the very beginning.

The magnetic deviation and air density aspects are, in my opinion, as important as having the appropriate mix of AC. I would much rather see a list of only 80 flyables instead of 100 (just throwing some numbers out to make my point since I have no idea how many there will ultimately be) and have the option to do real world, real time navigation.

To each his own.

You place more value on having a long list of flyables and I give having the option to do real navigation more importance than a long list of flyables.

And finally, if a company as lame as MS can do all this it should be no problem for the great Oleg to include it.

horseback
09-07-2004, 07:43 PM
I'm not worried about long flights-I built my computer with a relief tube!

To use, press P, and return when relief is achieved.

cheers

horseback

"Here's your new Mustangs, boys. You can learn to fly'em on the way to the target. Cheers!" -LTCOL Don Blakeslee, 4th FG CO, February 27th, 1944

BfHeFwMe
09-07-2004, 08:48 PM
I'm more worried about the stupidity of the AI, will they instantly drop to the deck after climbing 45 minutes when they see a bandit, like they do now. Watch them run out of fuel and ditch than.