PDA

View Full Version : Thoughts on the 1.11 patch



XyZspineZyX
09-21-2003, 04:36 PM
Hi people.
I personally think that 1.11 is an advance on 1.1b.
Unfortunately 1.1b was more a step backwards from the original than 1.11 is a step forwards from the first patch.

I was incredibly pleased by the Me262 FM with the latest patch. I previously had a rant about the way it had been ruined with the last patch because it lost its energy in turns far too quickly, and the Mk108s were unrealistically powerful. But now, I can't complain because I was still doing about 400kph from 800 after a 360 degree turn as I was testing it out last night, and a TB-3 survived 4 or 5 of my Mk108 hits. It wasn't tested scientifically, but first impressions were good.

However, the thing I hated most about the way 1.1b was worse than the original STILL isn't fixed. Originally the AI had landing and parking routines allowing them to all park up in a row next to each other after landing, and if an enemy bomber force landed in your bomber base for example you could have running ground battles going on, and you could shoot AIs after landing, (not in multiplayer of course.) Also you could keep track of who was dead and who wasn't, but NOW that planes just VANISH after landing you can't tell whos been shot down and whos evaporated, or have any of the fun you used to.
This really takes a dimension out of the game and really needs fixing.

The 109s seem well modelled, despite some other people's dissagreements, but the P40 is still way overmodelled when, as another example, it was modelled perfectly well in the original. P40s are supposed to be rubbish, so why doesn't it stall anymore, when much more 'advanced' aircraft like Fw190s stall the most easily of any in the game. I thought that P40s at the very least would be worse than 190s (although 190s are still faster of course.)

XyZspineZyX
09-21-2003, 04:36 PM
Hi people.
I personally think that 1.11 is an advance on 1.1b.
Unfortunately 1.1b was more a step backwards from the original than 1.11 is a step forwards from the first patch.

I was incredibly pleased by the Me262 FM with the latest patch. I previously had a rant about the way it had been ruined with the last patch because it lost its energy in turns far too quickly, and the Mk108s were unrealistically powerful. But now, I can't complain because I was still doing about 400kph from 800 after a 360 degree turn as I was testing it out last night, and a TB-3 survived 4 or 5 of my Mk108 hits. It wasn't tested scientifically, but first impressions were good.

However, the thing I hated most about the way 1.1b was worse than the original STILL isn't fixed. Originally the AI had landing and parking routines allowing them to all park up in a row next to each other after landing, and if an enemy bomber force landed in your bomber base for example you could have running ground battles going on, and you could shoot AIs after landing, (not in multiplayer of course.) Also you could keep track of who was dead and who wasn't, but NOW that planes just VANISH after landing you can't tell whos been shot down and whos evaporated, or have any of the fun you used to.
This really takes a dimension out of the game and really needs fixing.

The 109s seem well modelled, despite some other people's dissagreements, but the P40 is still way overmodelled when, as another example, it was modelled perfectly well in the original. P40s are supposed to be rubbish, so why doesn't it stall anymore, when much more 'advanced' aircraft like Fw190s stall the most easily of any in the game. I thought that P40s at the very least would be worse than 190s (although 190s are still faster of course.)

XyZspineZyX
09-21-2003, 05:31 PM
Hi Danschnel,


"However, the thing I hated most about the way 1.1b was worse than the original STILL isn't fixed. Originally the AI had landing and parking routines allowing them to all park up in a row next to each other after landing, and if an enemy bomber force landed in your bomber base for example you could have running ground battles going on, and you could shoot AIs after landing, (not in multiplayer of course.) Also you could keep track of who was dead and who wasn't, but NOW that planes just VANISH after landing you can't tell whos been shot down and whos evaporated, or have any of the fun you used to.
This really takes a dimension out of the game and really needs fixing."


AI planes disappear with good reason. Aircraft losses - even non-flyables and those outside your squadron - during campaign play are now logged and impact subsequent missions. But this would get messed up without parked planes disappearing as they now do because of collisions that had occurred fairly regularly during the taxiing routines. Similarly, if a plane were to get shot up prior to beginning its takeoff run so that it couldn't move, it would sit there effectively forever. Any planes lined up for takeoff behind it would crash into the wreckage, the AI being unable to negotiate the obstacle. You could lose your whole squadron this way.

I think too that now the player is credited for planes forced down behind their own lines. The downed plane will either explode or disappear (according to its level of damage, I suppose) at which time credit is recorded. Before, in previous versions, the plane would sit there forever or for long enough that the player wouldn't usually be credited for downing it.

I see the disappearing acts as a bandaid to mask deficiencies in the AI, which doesn't look real good but for campaign play it's better with it on.

I doubt any of this is perfectly accurate but it should be the gist of the matter.


Cheers,


Greg

XyZspineZyX
09-27-2003, 05:00 PM
I understand what you're saying, but nevertheless it doesn't mean that the vapourising planes are anything more than bad programming.
I don't think that it is wrong for crashed planes to dissappear by eventually exploding, allowing pilots to get kills. What is wrong is that planes dissappear after having safely parked.
Clearly the AI knows the difference between a plane that has sustained heavy damage and one that has just finished a parking routine.
If the AI didn't know what a parking routine was, it wouldn't be able to perform one. AI park because a certain part of programming language is being used, and non-vaporisation should be a part of this part of the programming.