From: opus@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (robin.g.kim)
Subject: Re: Falcon 3 and Fighting Tiger news
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 13:51:12 GMT
Keywords: hardware

In article <1992Aug20.140348.12704@newshost.lanl.gov> masten@beta.lanl.gov (David A. Masten) writes:
>Just got this from no19:
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Thanks for the feedback!  There's a new feature in Operation: Fighting Tiger
>that lets you adjust the overall campaign difficulty.  This will determine,
>among other things, how many enemy planes are generated.  
>
>[Ed: Yeah!]

Ditto!
Ditto again!

>We know that all
>those planes are not realistic, but most players want to see action.  No one
>wants to cruise for an hour real-time and have one dogfight :-)
>
>[Ed:  I do!  If I want "action", I'll load F15SEII  :-) ]

I'm with "Ed."  And who takes an hour real-time to complete one mission?
I, for one, make liberal use of the TAB key, even when in enemy airspace
(of course, I make sure my plane is trimmed properly first!).

>We fixed the fuel usage mix-up, but the flight models will stay the same. 
>
>[Ed: Booo!]
>
>Flight models are probably one of the trickiest parts of the sim to program,
>alas.  Some players like the High Fidelity stick response; others hate it.  I
>think it's great for dogfighting but lousy for bombing and landing.
>
>[Ed:  I think it sucks.  But maybe other sticks are better for it than
>my CH]

It really sounds like she is only addressing the flight model as it applies
to YOUR plane, not all the other planes in a mission.  If Falcon 3.0 is the
only game you play, I think the joystick response using a FlightStick is
acceptable, though it requires a very gentle hand.  This is the first game
I've ever played where the joystick actually does something when moved just
a hair off center.  Maybe you could try opening up your FlightStick and
replacing the springs with once that are four times stronger.  But then
you'd have to bolt the joystick to your desk.  :^)

>Enemy radar will now broadcast before they lock on you in Operation: Fighting
>Tiger.  Now your Shrikes and HARMs will have a fighting chance.

This is excellent!  Now maybe HARMs will be worth carrying for their extra
range, which isn't the case now when the SAM radars don't show up on the TWR
until you're under 20 miles away.

>We've gotten rid of the excess medals problem and the pilot's dogfighting
>skills rolling over as well.
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>I can feel myself slipping from my stand.  But not fixing flight models,
>especially opponent planes, is a big minus.  What's so hard about
>limiting copters to about 200 knots.  And adjusting acceleration and
>G-limits?  And having the F16 not fly better in autopilot than they can
>when you control them?

You have to wonder whether they have completely separate code for modelling
the flight of your F-16 and all other F-16s.

I imagine that changes to the flight modelling code would not only be tricky
(it may be highly optimized, and thus difficult to modify), but would
require an extremely large amount of testing in many situations, to make sure
no strange artifacts were introduced.  On the other hand, all you're asking
for are changes to performance limits, which shouldn't be too difficult.
SH probably feels not enough people would notice or care.

>Maybe it is tough, AOTP certainly didn't get climb rates right!

You can say that again!  Also, I noticed that a A6M3 Zero can accelerate from
0-100 mph in about 10 seconds on the ground.  This is comparable with a
Lamborghini Countach!  In fact, I believe that modern jet fighter aircraft
cannot beat fast cars in 0-60 races, and are about equal for 0-100 races, if
not faster.  (I'm a flight sim nut AND a car nut, so sue me).

Rob
ihlpy!opus@att.att.com
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games