PDA

View Full Version : Aces High



Codger1949
08-22-2008, 06:56 AM
I wanted to ask a question or two about this sim but I see no point about going to their forum.

I've been playing Il2 for 3 years and then just for giggles I thought I'd try Aces High. Lordy, lord. Talk about culture shock or something.

The graphics absolutely suck. The cockpits are ridiculous and the fm for aircraft are shocking compared to Il2. For example, I can easily avoid a p38 or p51 in a zero in Il2. I was amazed at what those two birds can do in Aces High. Is this realistic? They were kicking my butt at low altitude.

So I'm confused. What am I missing here? What is the attraction? Can somebody explain what the devil is going on with a game like that.

Oh yes. The reason I'm checking it out is because I ran into an Aces High bloke while playing multiplayer Il2. This guy was totally disappointed with Il2 and claimed he was returning the game. Something about fms sucking. Yeah, I can understand that after sticking my toes in the water with Aces High.

Like I said, no point in going to the Aces High forum to post this because they are obviously fans. Maybe somebody here could explain the really, really big fan base there.

Bearcat99
08-22-2008, 07:05 AM
The attraction is that some people have rigs that can't handle 46... There is also a massive online multiplayer.. and IMO many people try 46 and are taken aback by the fact that they cant hop in and yank & bank... For me there was no appeal.. I have been an exclusive 1C simmer since I first tried IL2 in 2002... BoB:WoV is ok.. certainly better than AH.. Fighter Aces is the same IMO... To each his own but AFAIC.. you are already in the premier WWII combat Flight sim to date.. why go slumming.

skarden
08-22-2008, 07:37 AM
well i tried aces's high II before i got into Il-2 bigtime,and i gotta say i did enjoy it for what it was,and i'll admit that i'v done a few dummy names for more trial periods for pretty much one reason and one reason only.

Main arena's!,the idea that you can join a master(ish) arena and fly in a big conflict against hundreds of other player and capture towns and airfields over a couple of weeks one by one untill you win the map/scenario to me is very cool http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

it's certainly a lot better then the DF server's that populate most of the IL-2 lanscape where there's no goal,except to shoot the other guy done no matter what,even to the point where they use you as bait and dont engage till your flaming and your attacker is trying to get away clean http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif

if oleg ever did the pay for play master server kind of deal that he's hinted at a few times(as a side project to SOW from what i'v read) where we'd have the latest eye candy and FM's and DM"s with a master online WWII world I'd pay quiet happily for it with a big *** grin on my face http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Codger1949
08-22-2008, 08:06 AM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
and IMO many people try 46 and are taken aback by the fact that they cant hop in and yank & bank... For me there was no appeal.. why go slumming.

Interestingly, the AH fellow I ran into was not handling his bird well. I'm average and I was flying circles around him which he noted. I think you have something there about yanking and banking.

R.e the slumming point, curiosity killed the cat and Il2 brought him back, or something to that effect. Sure there are aspects about Il2 which are debatable, lord knows the debate never ends here. But for sheer beauty Il2 makes AH looks kinda weak. I like to admire the planes, cockpits and scenery as much as I like to fly.

I do like being able to jump in a ground vehicle with guns or man an anti a/c gun while an airfield is under attack. That's kinda neat.

I just can't get over those lousy cockpits tho. An A6 with American gauges and gauges never seen before in an a/c of this era and a bullet counter for crying out loud.

Codger1949
08-22-2008, 11:59 AM
What does AFAIC mean?

What's Fighter Aces? Did a Google. No game showed up.

Another thing I'm curious about. Are the fms out of the ballpark with FA? I experienced a P-38 and P-51 behaving quite differently than I'm accustomed to experiencing in Il-2.

I_KG100_Prien
08-22-2008, 12:07 PM
AFAIC= As far as I'm concerned...

I gave Aces High a try and I spent more time driving around in the land vehicles and PT Boats than flying the aircraft.

If it's a pay to play game however, I've always been more willing to put my cash towards WW2 Online- same type of goals as Aces High but better done. Don't fly in WW2OL though it's just as much of a let down after being an IL2 player.

edit- Fighter Ace is similar to Aces High.

Codger1949
08-22-2008, 12:11 PM
Originally posted by I_KG100_Prien:
AFAIC= As far as I'm concerned...

I gave Aces High a try and I spent more time driving around in the land vehicles and PT Boats than flying the aircraft.

If it's a pay to play game however, I've always been more willing to put my cash towards WW2 Online- same type of goals as Aces High but better done. Don't fly in WW2OL though it's just as much of a let down after being an IL2 player.

edit- Fighter Ace is similar to Aces High.

Thank you.

Lol. I just encountered the inability to grab a plane and got stuck in some vehicle.

Frankly, I've been spoiled with Il-2. But my experiences with these alternatives have been interesting, albeit disconcerting.

Sorry about the Fighter Aces question. Dumb. Added an "ess". Can't be sloppy with my input, I'm constantly reminded.

I did Warbirds 3 years ago prior to Il-2. Very similar to Aces High and, I suspect, Fighter Ace.

Well, I just blew $14.95. Il-2 is an overwhelmingly superior product in most aspects, even if some A/C performance is perplexing, like the FM differences. The site claims they took painstaking efforts to model the aircraft accurately.

Bearcat99
08-22-2008, 12:32 PM
Fighter Ace (https://fighterace.ketsujin.com//Default2.asp) I tried both of them... There is anothr called Warbirds (http://www.totalsims.com/) as well... but I too am spoiled by this sim. For me. if it cant do at least what thois one does it is a step down..

Codger1949
08-22-2008, 12:36 PM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
Fighter Ace (https://fighterace.ketsujin.com//Default2.asp) I tried both of them... There is anothr called Warbirds (http://www.totalsims.com/) as well... but I too am spoiled by this sim. For me. if it cant do at least what thois one does it is a step down..

Yeah, I can't disagree Mr Bearcat99. Like I said, $14.95. down the loo.

Jaws2002
08-22-2008, 02:21 PM
Originally posted by Codger1949:
For example, I can easily avoid a p38 or p51 in a zero in Il2. I was amazed at what those two birds can do in Aces High. Is this realistic? They were kicking my butt at low altitude.

Can somebody explain what the devil is going on with a game like that..

That game is made in Texas for Texans. Sorry if it sounds harsh but that is an old fasion old looking game that is made to show the kids how we beat the nazis and Japanese back in ww2.

I played it for about 3 years. The only thing that kept me there was the massive multiplayer part of it. The big missions and big fights.

Codger1949
08-22-2008, 02:58 PM
That game is made in Texas for Texans. Sorry if it sounds harsh but that is an old fasion old looking game that is made to show the kids how we beat the nazis and Japanese back in ww2.

I played it for about 3 years. The only thing that kept me there was the massive multiplayer part of it. The big missions and big fights.

"Made in Texas for Texans"

That was something I noticed. I didn't hear one European player talking on their voice coms, not one, which I found curious. Not very cosmopolitan. Your explanation may also have some bearing on why I, in a fairly nimble Zero, was having an awfully difficult time evading a 51 and 38, which I could typically dance around at low altitude in Il-2, even with mediocre skills.

Jaws2002
08-22-2008, 03:18 PM
There are a good number of Europeans but the numbers of players allowed in the arenas favor US/Canada time zome. When is evening in Europe the number of players allowed in one server is a lot lower. Something like 100 players and if there are only 150 players in total they can't all join the same arena. They have to split between two, three arenas, with three teams each.
Not very friendly for people that can play during those times.

And the P-XX aircraft...well you saw it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

DaddyAck
08-22-2008, 09:38 PM
I have flown AHII for years befor ecoming over to IL2. I like the MMOG aspect of it, though yeah I will admit my 3 largest complaints is this. One, the remarkably overly good handling characteristics of the American birds. Two the way that Icons ae always present in an arena with no axis/allies searation (except for in FSO and the one arena for axis vs allies that is alwayss empty) nor any type of weather patterns EVER. Thirdly while all the base capture is great, most time the MAs (main arenas) end up as on the deck furballs with all the late war mounts (mostly LA7, Nik2, P51, F4u-1,...ETC ETC...

BUT

That aside, I have loved that sim for some time. While it still has it's shortfalls, it is not "wasted" money.

FeiHu
08-22-2008, 10:04 PM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
Fighter Ace (https://fighterace.ketsujin.com//Default2.asp) I tried both of them... There is anothr called Warbirds (http://www.totalsims.com/) as well... but I too am spoiled by this sim. For me. if it cant do at least what thois one does it is a step down.. BUMP! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif Spoiled rotten to the core....I'm ruined for any other flight sim!

TX-Gunslinger
08-22-2008, 11:03 PM
Originally posted by Codger1949:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">

That game is made in Texas for Texans. Sorry if it sounds harsh but that is an old fasion old looking game that is made to show the kids how we beat the nazis and Japanese back in ww2.

I played it for about 3 years. The only thing that kept me there was the massive multiplayer part of it. The big missions and big fights.

"Made in Texas for Texans"

That was something I noticed. I didn't hear one European player talking on their voice coms, not one, which I found curious. Not very cosmopolitan. Your explanation may also have some bearing on why I, in a fairly nimble Zero, was having an awfully difficult time evading a 51 and 38, which I could typically dance around at low altitude in Il-2, even with mediocre skills. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I guess it would be sort of a waste to point out that it's a big state in area and population .... and that a large majority of us 5th and 6th generation Texans are of German and Czech origin.

I guess I should be content with the comment, considering no one that I know in the TX squadron has ever flow that POS.

On the other hand, if your comments slow down, in any measure, the annoying recent influx of immigrants from other parts of the United States, it'll serve my purpose.

Are you sure those guys aren't Okies and posers, Jaws?


S~

Gunny

Freiwillige
08-23-2008, 05:15 AM
Originally posted by TX-Gunslinger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Codger1949:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">

That game is made in Texas for Texans. Sorry if it sounds harsh but that is an old fasion old looking game that is made to show the kids how we beat the nazis and Japanese back in ww2.

I played it for about 3 years. The only thing that kept me there was the massive multiplayer part of it. The big missions and big fights.

"Made in Texas for Texans"

That was something I noticed. I didn't hear one European player talking on their voice coms, not one, which I found curious. Not very cosmopolitan. Your explanation may also have some bearing on why I, in a fairly nimble Zero, was having an awfully difficult time evading a 51 and 38, which I could typically dance around at low altitude in Il-2, even with mediocre skills. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I guess it would be sort of a waste to point out that it's a big state in area and population .... and that a large majority of us 5th and 6th generation Texans are of German and Czech origin.

I guess I should be content with the comment, considering no one that I know in the TX squadron has ever flow that POS.

On the other hand, if your comments slow down, in any measure, the annoying recent influx of immigrants from other parts of the United States, it'll serve my purpose.

Are you sure those guys aren't Okies and posers, Jaws?


S~

Gunny </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

German and Czeck Texans? My god I am German and Czeck, and a Cowboy to boot! But alas I am an Arizona native born and raised so it would be hard to leave. But if I could be born elswhere It would have to be Texas, Cause damn you just dont mess with Texas! You never hear that guff about Arizona. Nobody cares if you mess with Arizona, But I reckon thats because all The Az Cowboys became city folk and traded their Fords, Chevys And Dodges in for BMW's and and Honda's. Thats it Im moving to Texas!

Codger1949
08-23-2008, 05:26 AM
Originally posted by DaddyAck:
I have flown AHII for years befor ecoming over to IL2. I like the MMOG aspect of it, though yeah I will admit my 3 largest complaints is this. One, the remarkably overly good handling characteristics of the American birds. Two the way that Icons ae always present in an arena with no axis/allies searation (except for in FSO and the one arena for axis vs allies that is alwayss empty) nor any type of weather patterns EVER. Thirdly while all the base capture is great, most time the MAs (main arenas) end up as on the deck furballs with all the late war mounts (mostly LA7, Nik2, P51, F4u-1,...ETC ETC...

BUT

That aside, I have loved that sim for some time. While it still has it's shortfalls, it is not "wasted" money. Thanks for the answer. I feel better about the 15 bucks I plopped down. I was just looking for a little variety which is the spice of life, right?

Fehler
08-23-2008, 05:29 AM
I cannot believe anyone has not touched on the absolutely horrible marketing that the IL2 series received from UBI.

This is, without a doubt the premier WWII combat flight sim. Yet ask around and no one has ever heard of it. Yet the novice flight simmer has heard of the CFS series and Aces High.

UBI has always been the lead weight holding IL2 from completely soaring above the rest as it should have.

Honestly, had I not Googled WWII combat simulator and discovered the demo way back in (Well hell I don't even know how long I have been fiddling with this sim!) I would have never even noticed it.

Fortunately, albeit much to the chagrin of my spouse (Hahaha!) I found IL2 and tossed everything else away.

Codger1949
08-23-2008, 11:02 AM
Originally posted by Fehler:
I cannot believe anyone has not touched on the absolutely horrible marketing that the IL2 series received from UBI.

This is, without a doubt the premier WWII combat flight sim. Yet ask around and no one has ever heard of it. Yet the novice flight simmer has heard of the CFS series and Aces High.

UBI has always been the lead weight holding IL2 from completely soaring above the rest as it should have.

Honestly, had I not Googled WWII combat simulator and discovered the demo way back in (Well hell I don't even know how long I have been fiddling with this sim!) I would have never even noticed it.

Fortunately, albeit much to the chagrin of my spouse (Hahaha!) I found IL2 and tossed everything else away.

I was playing Warbirds 3 years ago and heard about Il-2 from a fellow there. Then I researched it. Fry's Electronics didn't carry the game, just the CFS stuff which simply doesn't measure up. Never could figure out why Gates didn't do a better job with it. Probably because there's more money in OS and business software.

VMF-214_HaVoK
08-23-2008, 12:14 PM
Originally posted by Codger1949:This guy was totally disappointed with Il2 and claimed he was returning the game. Something about fms sucking.

Its simple, IL2 was just too challenging for him and he was getting pwned. No WW2 sim on a the scale of IL2 comes as close to real world performance...fact.

S!

Wurkeri
08-23-2008, 12:26 PM
IMHO

AH
+flight modeling
+online playing
-worse graphics
-monthly payment

Il-2
+more planes
+better graphics
+fun also off-line
+virtually free after initial payment
-on-line somewhat limited

Codger1949
08-23-2008, 01:38 PM
Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:


Its simple, IL2 was just too challenging for him and he was getting pwned. No WW2 sim on a the scale of IL2 comes as close to real world performance...fact.

S!

That's what I suspect. Well, I'm going to get my 15 dollars worth. Unfortunately, I'll have to relearn how to fly by Il-2 standards upon returning, and get owned in the process http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Nice comparison Wurkeri.

p51srule
08-23-2008, 02:13 PM
Ive played AH for several yrs but about 1yr ago a hack got into the game and screwed it all up like the 8 player which 8 people could hang out and practie they got rid of that and thats when I found the Il-2 series 1 of my friends on Xfire was playing it and he told me it was 100X better than AH so I bought IL-2 and I was hooked. but their well always be a part of me still hooked to AH. If any of u have played with me on 8 player in AH those where some good times.

P51srule http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

Jure_502
08-23-2008, 02:59 PM
It's like playing an online game, it can be great fun, but really no history or true tehnical feedback.

And graphics SUCKS http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

Il-2 1946 owns pretty much anything. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Jaws2002
08-23-2008, 07:08 PM
Originally posted by Wurkeri:
IMHO

AH
+flight modeling


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

ImMoreBetter
08-23-2008, 07:09 PM
The AH flight model is fairly good, but it is extremely over-hyped.

Jaws2002
08-23-2008, 07:20 PM
I remember spawning a formation of bombers full of bombs on a base, push throttle to max and go do my laundry.(when enemy team had numbers so they couldn't use Me-163).
When I was done with the laundry, my bombers were at 33k over enemy teritory. All I had to do was point towards enemy HQ set bombsight and turn their lights off with a single formation.
Once you drop the bombs from the B-17 or B-24 you were untouchable.
Talk about good FM's.

idonno
08-23-2008, 07:27 PM
Originally posted by Wurkeri:
AH
+flight modeling


Surely you jest.

cmorris975
08-23-2008, 08:35 PM
Actually AH flight modeling is pretty decent for what it is. It is just different from IL2, with different strengths and weaknesses in the FM. I'd say IL2s is better, but planes in AH definitely have a feel to them, a personality I sometimes cannot find in IL2s' planes. Just because you can auto-pilot yourself safely to 33k doesn't mean that the physics in the game are off that off.

VMF-214_HaVoK
08-23-2008, 09:17 PM
Originally posted by Wurkeri:
IMHO

AH
+flight modeling
+online playing
-worse graphics
-monthly payment

Il-2
+more planes
+better graphics
+fun also off-line
+virtually free after initial payment
-on-line somewhat limited

+flight modeling for AH? You sure that opinion of yours is honest. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif If I may ask what is the basis of you opinion in this catagory?

S!

DaddyAck
08-23-2008, 09:33 PM
Originally posted by p51srule:
Ive played AH for several yrs but about 1yr ago a hack got into the game and screwed it all up like the 8 player which 8 people could hang out and practie they got rid of that and thats when I found the Il-2 series 1 of my friends on Xfire was playing it and he told me it was 100X better than AH so I bought IL-2 and I was hooked. but their well always be a part of me still hooked to AH. If any of u have played with me on 8 player in AH those where some good times.

P51srule http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

what was you CPID? My CPID was as it is now DaddyAck. I used to fly mainly Knights, flew for 1 squadron for almost the whole time I flew there. JG44 Knight Hawks later redeginated JV44 Butcher Birds. I don't even know if they are still around or not to be honest.

About FMs,...

When I started to get fed up with all the chest thumping and dweebery, not to mention the perpetual infux of squeakers (pre pubecent teens on VOX using the 2 week free trial) every squeaker season (when the kiddies got out for summer break) blowign up my ear drums. I began to seek out another sim, hence I heard of this one on the AHII forums. There I saw them say that we here in IL2 have "vanilla" FMs. Now I am confused because when I was there in AHII taking off and landing on the CV was even easy. I came here and WOW I was amazed. I could hardly take off properly from an air field let alone a CV. Now I am used to IL2's FM so I would have to deem this sims FM better since I have had the time to compare. I would have to say though that Icons in AHII REALLY ruin SA. I mean I had to re-learn all about SA in the full switch servers that I hang out in. So I think that if one ever was to migrate from here to AHII their SA and ACM skills would suffer from it.

Wurkeri
08-23-2008, 10:23 PM
Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
+flight modeling for AH? You sure that opinion of yours is honest. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif If I may ask what is the basis of you opinion in this catagory?


I played AH before Il-2 and it's my honest opinion that in the AH as example stall characters tend to vary more realistic than in the Il-2. I don't rate myself as an particularly experienced on neither simulations, however, I have played both couple years. The main reason I switched to the Il-2 is that I play too occasionally to justify the monthly payment of the AH.

BTW I knew that this kind opinion would raise questions here. I can tolerate your opinion but can you tolerate mine?

mortoma
08-23-2008, 10:29 PM
What about Targetware and Warbirds? I thought they stank but anybody like them? I think both Air Warrior and Warbirds are non-existant these days, right? Or are they still around?

I know Targetware is still around but I never tried it. Don't want to. I'm sure old Stigler could be found on their server though. Stigler was a piece of work for sure.

cmorris975
08-24-2008, 05:38 PM
Targetware is still around and has an interesting FM, a complex one for sure. Stiglr is there yes. And Air Warrior bit the bucket a few years ago.

mortoma
08-24-2008, 06:19 PM
I tried a demo for Warbirds about 4 years ago and it seemed super arcadey. Anyone ever try it?

VMF-214_HaVoK
08-24-2008, 08:51 PM
Originally posted by Wurkeri:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
+flight modeling for AH? You sure that opinion of yours is honest. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif If I may ask what is the basis of you opinion in this catagory?


I played AH before Il-2 and it's my honest opinion that in the AH as example stall characters tend to vary more realistic than in the Il-2. I don't rate myself as an particularly experienced on neither simulations, however, I have played both couple years. The main reason I switched to the Il-2 is that I play too occasionally to justify the monthly payment of the AH.

BTW I knew that this kind opinion would raise questions here. I can tolerate your opinion but can you tolerate mine? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of course I can tolerate your opinion and your entitled to it. But you must realize when you share your opinion with others it may be challenged and you should be prepared for that. But I disagree with your opinion in every way and Im sure Im not alone here. AH is no where near the level of IL2 when it comes to flight modeling. You should realize that many sims of the day made flying hard because they lacked knowledge in the department so they favored "hard" assuming it meant more real. Its simply false.

S!

Codger1949
08-24-2008, 09:36 PM
Originally posted by mortoma:
I tried a demo for Warbirds about 4 years ago and it seemed super arcadey. Anyone ever try it? Flew Warbirds. Not quite sure what you mean by arcady. If you mean arcady like Pacific Fighters or Wings of War, than no. Similar to AH. Graphics are poor. FM totally different than Il-2. But never having flown a WW2 plane, or possessing aeronautical engineering expertise or being an afinciado of this genre I have no clue as to what is accurate. I will say this, having experience in flying civilian a/c, the stall, spin and recovery characteristics are closer to reality in AH. But again I qualify my statement by saying that I have no idea if stall, spin, etc in a light civilian private plane is similar to that of a heavy as* ww2 fighter.

Wurkeri
08-25-2008, 02:33 AM
Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
Of course I can tolerate your opinion and your entitled to it. But you must realize when you share your opinion with others it may be challenged and you should be prepared for that. But I disagree with your opinion in every way and Im sure Im not alone here.

Well, if you look above you can see that I am not alone here either. I agree with cmorris regarding the different feel on AH planes, and stall characters definately vary much more in the AH planes than in the Il-2. And that is my honest opinion, which you questioned.

You see, we can disagree without questioning each others honesty.


Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
You should realize that many sims of the day made flying hard because they lacked knowledge in the department so they favored "hard" assuming it meant more real. Its simply false.

I don't think that there is much difference regarding the difficulty of flying between these sims. However, in the AH the differences between the planes appear to be larger. One big difference is that AH does not have such complex engine management as the Il-2 at hard settings.

Kurfurst__
08-25-2008, 02:49 AM
Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Wurkeri:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
+flight modeling for AH? You sure that opinion of yours is honest. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif If I may ask what is the basis of you opinion in this catagory?


I played AH before Il-2 and it's my honest opinion that in the AH as example stall characters tend to vary more realistic than in the Il-2. I don't rate myself as an particularly experienced on neither simulations, however, I have played both couple years. The main reason I switched to the Il-2 is that I play too occasionally to justify the monthly payment of the AH.

BTW I knew that this kind opinion would raise questions here. I can tolerate your opinion but can you tolerate mine? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of course I can tolerate your opinion and your entitled to it. But you must realize when you share your opinion with others it may be challenged and you should be prepared for that. But I disagree with your opinion in every way and Im sure Im not alone here. AH is no where near the level of IL2 when it comes to flight modeling. You should realize that many sims of the day made flying hard because they lacked knowledge in the department so they favored "hard" assuming it meant more real. Its simply false.

S! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed. Having tried AH briefly, it simply cannot compare with Il-2. Nor should this expected, AFAIK AH is made by a very small development team. For that, it is impressive, but in absolute terms, it just cannot compare. The cocpits are horrible, the historical accuracy for example in the case of loadouts is horrible (for no gunpods for 109K because the developer *think* it just wasn't there...). The Flight Model can be of course argued, IMHO the values are about on spec, but the flight behaviour is just too arcadish, the take off and landing is even worse (I have to wonder how many crashes people coming from AH make in Il2..) and the gunnery is just ridiculously easy compared to the realistic hit-boxes that take Il2 so much apart from the competition.

The only advantage I see for AH is the MMO setting, and here Battlefield Europe comes to mind. Actually, AH is somewhere between BE and Il-2: it has better FM than BE, but cannot compare to the combined arms land action you see in BE (in comparison, the AH has primitive land action in terms of concept, visuality and variety of units), nor cannot compare to Il2's refined flight, gunnery and damage model nor the visuality, though it has land action (but frankly, take a look at it, and you start to wonder, for what..?).

DaddyAck
08-25-2008, 03:32 AM
Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
(I have to wonder how many crashes people coming from AH make in Il2..) and the gunnery is just ridiculously easy compared to the realistic hit-boxes that take Il2 so much apart from the competition.
.

Kurfurst, let me answer that landing questin for you....ALOT! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif I crashed ALOT when learning to fly IL2 as opposed to the years of landing and taking off AHII style. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif Let me also say that you are correct about the gunnery in AHII as opposed to here. I am STILL adapting to the gunnery here, where I could land 4 or 5 kill sorties in AHII with regularity http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif (atleast 2 kill sorties most of the time) I have not until just yesterday in Zeke Vs. Wildcat server on HL landed my FIRST multi kill sortie! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

So yeah the conversion to IL2 after flying there in AHII exclusively for years is a daunting task. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif Dont even get me started on learning to ID targets friend or foe on full switch servers versus the icons always on no ID or IFF necacary type of SA in AHII. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

I do so love IL2 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif , I am fourtunate to have found it and fourtunate to find a great squadron to be in, and a great comunity here on these boards to associate with. http://media.ubi.com/us/forum_images/gf-glomp.gif

skarden
08-25-2008, 03:47 AM
+1 Amen DaddyAck http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Codger1949
08-26-2008, 09:04 AM
Ijust experienced a rather unbelievable outcome after flying a seafire IIc vs. a BF110.

This guy was about 1000' above me and dived on me. I immediately went into a very sharp left turning orbit, taking advantage of p factor and resulting tendancy towards yaw to port. This guy started to slowly fall in behind me. I increased the turn until I was "riding the tunnel" as the AH guys like to call it. The other pilot STILL managed to stay on my tail and shoot me down after following me in over a 360 degree turn.

How is this possible? The spit has a turn time of approx. 17 at 1000m per second as opposed to the 110 turn time of 33. The BF110 can no way stay in a turn with a spit, as I've experienced in Il-2, but yet it happened in Aces High. This makes me wonder about flight modeling.

Can somebody explain this please.

I posed this question on the AH forums. Not particularly surprised by the answers I got.

One guy said I should learn better tactics than a simple turn. I wonder what that might be if the 110 can follow every move I make at nap of the earth.

Another guy said this:

"was it a 110C? If it was then your mistaken. The 110C can pull harder in a flat turn than a seafire as long as the 110 has E to play with. There is nothing wrong with the modeling."

My jaw hit the ground on that one.

A third guy said this which is I find debatable:

"The limitation for both you and the 110 in this case was where blackout occurs, and, it happens to occur at the same place for both of you (7 G's). The plane's inherant capabilities had nothing to do with the outcome.

In a high speed, high G turn where you are riding the tunnel you are not turning at your minimum turn radius. Had you cut the throttle to avoid maximum G's you probably would have turned inside him easily.

In addition, he may have cut throttle to easily turn inside of you.

I think that after my month is up it will be bye, bye to Aces High.

I think I'll also invite them to visit this forum. They might learn something.

Kurfurst__
08-26-2008, 09:44 AM
Perhaps the 110 taking advantage of its initial higher E-state, forced you into a high-G, E-bleeding turn using his initial E and then it just maintained a sustained turn rate at corner speed, while you bled all the energy out and eventaully slowed down so much he could actually outturn you with his sustained (optimal) turn?

I guess the 110s biggest advantage apart from its armament that people tend to underestimate it.. its often a fatal mistake.

Codger1949
08-26-2008, 10:10 AM
I set up this scenario in QMB. Set the opponent on Ace and me on Average and gave him the altitude advantage. Even in the clunky Seafire I easily out turned him. He then utilized his one advantage which is extending. I chased him briefly and did a 180 and ran like hell. He naturally pursued after realizing I was in retreat. I waited unit he was 50 meters behind me, at full throttle and easily closing the distance and firing and then I did a hard left turn. No way could he stay with me.

The suggestion one guy made from AH that he cut his throttle and thus tightened his turn is ludicrous on the face of it. At a high G turn, on the ragged edge of a stall, it is suicidal to cut throttle.

I'm going to reverse positions and see if I can replicate the case you describe Kurfurst.

This is a very disturbing revelation about AH. I doubt that I will debate these issues with these guys. It would turn out to be fruitless, I imagine.

idonno
08-26-2008, 10:35 AM
AH is known for having too little differences in performance from one plane to the next. There is no way that what you described could ever happen in IL2, and I don't believe it could have happened in real life either. The 110's needed 109 escorts once they started running into Spits and Hurricanes.

idonno
08-26-2008, 11:08 AM
Originally posted by Codger1949:
I set up this scenario in QMB.

Fighting the AI is not a valid test of such tings. I can easily beat an ace Spit AI with a 110. That certainly wouldn't be the case against even a fairly new human adversary.

Kurfursts' explanation has merit, but only if the fight didn't actually happen as skarden described it. If the 110 maintains sufficient maneuvering speed while the Spit bleeds his away, the 110 could then pull inside briefly, but he'd have to work the angles and timing just right. He certainly would have lost the opportunity once he fell in behind the spit and began to follow it into a max G turn.

Codger1949
08-26-2008, 11:11 AM
Originally posted by idonno:
AH is known for having too little differences in performance from one plane to the next. There is no way that what you described could ever happen in IL2, and I don't believe it could have happened in real life either. The 110's needed 109 escorts once they started running into Spits and Hurricanes.

I just came back from AH after trying out THEIR version of the 110c. My experience borders on the Twilight Zone. Their version handles damn close to the Il2 La7 and that aint much of an exageration, probably closer would be the Il2 Spit III. No wonder he easily stayed on my six.

This is NOT reasonable. With evenno charts, spec sheets etc or technical expertise common sense would not permit one to believe this. A heavy, twin eng. fighter, attack plane outmaneuvering a relatively light fighter. No way.

I agree with you idonno. Performance is suspiciously close between A/C in AH. I suspect the developers didn't do quite as much research as the Il2 crew.

Oh yes. I could NOT stall out and spin the 110c in AH. Had the stick full back. She would climb, mush, and then climb again without airspeed dropping below 150 mph. Come on. Get serious.

idonno
08-26-2008, 11:26 AM
Originally posted by Codger1949:
The suggestion one guy made from AH that he cut his throttle and thus tightened his turn is ludicrous on the face of it. At a high G turn, on the ragged edge of a stall, it is suicidal to cut throttle.

Actually it does work. Stalling is about angle of attack, not airspeed. If you maintain the same AOA while reducing airspeed (to a point) you will not stall and your turn will tighten. Below a certain speed you will start going around the circle at a slower rate, but the circle will still be smaller. It's not guaranteed to get you a shot because your turn radius advantage might not be sufficient to negate the other guys' turn rate advantage, but it might. Eventually the enemy may be able to fly around your small circle and get behind you.

Codger1949
08-26-2008, 11:46 AM
I'm a CFI. I don't entirely agree with your explanation of the dynamics of a stall. It leaves out the counter effect of power which is effective up to a point. However, I stand corrected if WW2 military a/c handle stalls differently than civilian a/c.

I_KG100_Prien
08-26-2008, 12:38 PM
The flight modeling of AH reminds me of the way planes flew in some of the first air combat sims I played... (Their Finest Hour: BOB, SWOTL, AOP, AOE)

Which there was no stalling from turning too hard, and you could easily be successful with yank 'n bank fighting. IIRC the only time a stall happened is if you were in a long climb and went below "stall speed". Then the stall was simple- the plane nosed down until you picked up speed.

IL2 was the first combat sim I'd picked up since Aces over Europe. A lot of my habits from that got me into a lot of trouble the first few times I took to the skies.. In fact I remember coming to these forums and asking for help.

So, as I said- AH felt the same way to me as the early sims. Which is why I wound up just being a mobile AAA with a PT Boat. After IL2 I just can't go back to anything that feels more like an arcade game.

Codger1949
08-26-2008, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by I_KG100_Prien:
The flight modeling of AH reminds me of the way planes flew in some of the first air combat sims I played... (Their Finest Hour: BOB, SWOTL, AOP, AOE)

Which there was no stalling from turning too hard, and you could easily be successful with yank 'n bank fighting. IIRC the only time a stall happened is if you were in a long climb and went below "stall speed". Then the stall was simple- the plane nosed down until you picked up speed.

IL2 was the first combat sim I'd picked up since Aces over Europe. A lot of my habits from that got me into a lot of trouble the first few times I took to the skies.. In fact I remember coming to these forums and asking for help.

So, as I said- AH felt the same way to me as the early sims. Which is why I wound up just being a mobile AAA with a PT Boat. After IL2 I just can't go back to anything that feels more like an arcade game.

I agree. I find the PT boats, ack and tanks more believable than the planes.

DaddyAck
08-26-2008, 11:27 PM
whas the guy that shot you down name be "Dastrdly" if so he is VERY good in that 110. I used to pal around with him and I enjoyed fighting him no matter what I flew. He flies it very well indeed. Keep in mind also that all they do there most of the time is furball on the deck and they are used to dealing with an over abundance of spit pilots. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Codger1949
09-01-2008, 07:35 AM
Well...I tried the game for about 2 weeks. It's just not my cup of tea. I guess I'm too spoiled by Il-2, or too comfortable with it, whatever.

I prefer dogfighting. In Aces High you spend much of your time either defending bases or trying to capture them. This means you are either flying a bomber or manning some kind of ground gun. Yes, there is dog fighting but... it just isn't the same. I played Warbirds years ago and came to Il-2 and got hooked.

Getting a little tired of the open pit arcade dogfight servers I thought I'd give AH a try. They do have closed pit, which I prefer, but I still can't past the graphics and cockpits and different FMs. Different strokes for different folks I suppose.

I canceled my AH account and came back home.

Bearcat99
09-01-2008, 07:45 AM
Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Wurkeri:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
+flight modeling for AH? You sure that opinion of yours is honest. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif If I may ask what is the basis of you opinion in this catagory?


I played AH before Il-2 and it's my honest opinion that in the AH as example stall characters tend to vary more realistic than in the Il-2. I don't rate myself as an particularly experienced on neither simulations, however, I have played both couple years. The main reason I switched to the Il-2 is that I play too occasionally to justify the monthly payment of the AH.

BTW I knew that this kind opinion would raise questions here. I can tolerate your opinion but can you tolerate mine? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of course I can tolerate your opinion and your entitled to it. But you must realize when you share your opinion with others it may be challenged and you should be prepared for that. But I disagree with your opinion in every way and Im sure Im not alone here. AH is no where near the level of IL2 when it comes to flight modeling. You should realize that many sims of the day made flying hard because they lacked knowledge in the department so they favored "hard" assuming it meant more real. Its simply false.

S! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are not alone..



Originally posted by Codger1949:
I canceled my AH account and came back home.

Really??!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif Duhh... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Kettenhunde
09-01-2008, 09:38 AM
You should realize that many sims of the day made flying hard because they lacked knowledge in the department so they favored "hard" assuming it meant more real. Its simply false.


That is very true. Airplanes are designed to fly. They are designed to be controlled in flight and on the ground.

Propeller aircraft love to keep the whirly end up front and are in many circumstances, much smarter than the pilot when it comes to flying.

Games tend to greatly exaggerate aircraft characteristics because the folks programming them have little actual experience at the controls of an airplane.

The loss of speed in a turn, the stalls, propeller effects, are all examples of over blown characteristics.

All the best,

Crumpp

Codger1949
09-01-2008, 09:55 AM
Originally posted by DaddyAck:
whas the guy that shot you down name be "Dastrdly" if so he is VERY good in that 110. I used to pal around with him and I enjoyed fighting him no matter what I flew. He flies it very well indeed. Keep in mind also that all they do there most of the time is furball on the deck and they are used to dealing with an over abundance of spit pilots. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Now that you mentioned it I did encounter a fellow flying a 110 and his name is Dastrdly.