Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
#561666 - 07/10/01 08:30 PM I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


This is probably going to be my last post on this board for a bit...

I really don't understand how Rage could create a game that was so far on a tangent away from the original.

I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought EF2000 (and the later versions) was the best selling flight simulator EVER, bar MS Flight Sim on the PC.

And when it came out, what was it known for?:

* Unprecedented realism graphics wise - Typhoon has this just about, so fair enough

* Dynamic(ish) campaign, that was realistic, i.e. no motherlands

* Relatively hardcore (definitely for it's time) - the different Radar modes were there (okay, the full aircraft's got 33 of them, but you get my point - you could change range, elevation, turn it on/off, select targets from it)

* Realistic flight model (I think Typhoon's got this)

* Realistic Weapons (for the ones known - the ASRAAM and S-225 were obviously guessed at, but they were realistic - I'm not saying accurate, but thereabouts)

* Refuelling

* Multiplayer campaign

The list goes on.

A lot of people at the time (IMO, anyway - and friends at the time) got the game because:

* New to flightsims - and liked it - if they liked a hardcore flightsim then FFS, why won't they now, IF it's got what they want

* It was British - I never thought much about this aspect at the time, but looking back, I think it may have been quite important

* It was realistic

---

I'm not saying Typhoon's a disaster, I'm just saying a large number of people (they may be the minority, I don't know) are moaning not about bugs, like F4, MigAlley or BoB, but about the game itself.

Granted it would have taken longer to add things like multiplayer campaign, etc, but if it was done in 1995 and was a complete success, although admittedly the hardcore market may have diminished, I seriously think people would be interested in a game like EF2000, but with fantastic updated graphics.

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm right - I'm just posting my opinion.

As a sidenote, anyone know where I can/could get Super EF2000?

Cheers,
Manteau

Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#561667 - 07/10/01 08:50 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


I have to agree.

Typhoon is a very cool little game, that looks great, and is pretty amusing, and challenging.

Only.

It's not SEF2k. Granted, it wasn't meant to be, but ....

I think its time to seriously look at creating an ultimate TFX game, combining the best of all the games that have come before. It does not have to be super hardcore -we all know how easy the typhoon is to fly. It just needs some _optional_ avionics at the level of TAW or SEF2k. It needs to maintain that same compelling atmosphere of EF2000. EF2000 is the only game that I actually start fretting when the enemy advances. I know how difficult things will be if the enemy gets any further south.

This graphics engine has the potential to power such a sim. We already have the campaign AI, the dogfighting AI, and the flight model. Just add an optional drag mode.

The scenario I would envisage would be a huge map, bigger than TAW's or Jane's F-15's map. I am talking from Greenland in the West, to Belarus in the East. From the Arctic Circle in the North, to Northern Scotland in the South.

We need the AWACS back.

We need to have RAF E-3 patroling the North Sea, and the GIUK gap, vectoring fighters against Backfire raids and surfaced Russian subs, and intercepting air raids on the UK PLC.

We need to see the Battle of Norway again, in real time. We need to watch as the RN faces off against the Russian navy.

We need to have a NATO invasion of the Baltic states.

Gavin

#561668 - 07/10/01 09:03 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Jane's F/A-18

-.-

#561669 - 07/10/01 11:24 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


With a bigger map, a zippier plan, the Royal Air Force, and the DID heritage.

:-)

Gavin

#561670 - 07/10/01 11:31 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Quote:
Originally posted by Gavin Bennett:
With a bigger map, a zippier plan, the Royal Air Force, and the DID heritage.


Yeah,

Post that map Gavin.

Cheers,
Manteau

#561671 - 07/11/01 05:07 AM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Now THIS is what we are talking about.



Prime DID territory, in the Royal Air Force's backyard, and damn cool!

Gavin

#561672 - 07/11/01 08:07 AM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


i don't know about u guys.....but i'm giving up on this sim! can't understand the gameplay of this, maybe dats why they call it REALISTIC SIMPLE...

#561673 - 07/11/01 09:14 AM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


I actually had the heart to reinstall EFT yesterday, just for the sake of "stunt flying" in flyby and external mode. Now that part + the sound in external mode is IMO really well done in EFT !

My bottom line for EFT is:

If the end mission would not suck so much and the cockpit were done realistic thus clickable, I'd rate this a (very) fine and userfriendly Typhoon showcase...um SIM,

Though very incomplete (no instant action missions and a mission builder)

But with potential regarding Add ons.

I like the Tornado, Saab Gripen aso cutscenes and SU-37 in EFT (not playable understandebly for the Typhoon rules supreme here -but not in endmission !???) and admittedly quite repetetive after a while).

There's a lot more to say ofcourse but I leave it to that.

#561674 - 07/11/01 11:22 AM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Ever since I found out about the Motherland ending, I stopped flying EFT. I was only towards the start of day two. Just couldn't believe the end would happen that way. Completely took all the desire away, not to mention some of the other problems it's got.
It really is a shame. This game could have been huge. But I did learn some things about buying software that I will never forget. I guess 40 buck for a lesson in finances isn't too bad.

#561675 - 07/11/01 12:19 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


I flew the campaign once. The final mission made me never want to fly it again. Do I feel ripped off? Nah, it was only 30 quid. It did keep me entertained for a few days. How long would 30 quid last down the pub on a night out? A couple of hours perhaps? In that respect, I got my money's worth out of Typhoon.

As for the negatives, no need to repeat them here

P.S. I still wish the publishers would increase the price for a sim and give the developers more free reign/time to make a kick ass sim, instead of the usual half baked crap we seem to see these days.

Sims have been roughly the same price now for the last 10 years. I know my wage isn't the same as it was 10 years ago.... It's a lot more

------------------


Hengist.

Hengist's MiG Alley Site.
http://www.hengist.co.uk/MiGAlley

[This message has been edited by *Hengist* (edited 07-11-2001).]

#561676 - 07/11/01 12:22 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


C'mon Coffee, what's 40 bucks FCOL That's what I make (bill) in 20 minutes. Bet it took Rage/Did longer to make it

#561677 - 07/11/01 01:18 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,364
Tracer[formerly of CS] Offline
Senior Member
Tracer[formerly of CS]  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,364
Quote:
Originally posted by Manteau:
I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought EF2000 (and the later versions) was the best selling flight simulator EVER, bar MS Flight Sim on the PC.

As a sidenote, anyone know where I can/could get Super EF2000?

Cheers,
Manteau


EF2000 was bought and used as a training simulator for the RAF -it cost 4Million and the quote was that: The PC version had *better* graphics and colour!

As to where to buy EF2000 V2?
I bought it from Chips&Bits Manteau
http://www.cdmag.com/chips.html
It came with the original 300+ page manual,keycard,Win95& DOS 3DFX/Rendition install(weighed about 1 1/2lb)

EF2000 Version 2 W95/DOS CD KA Simulation 07/97 $ 12.95

10-20 day's shipment(i got mine in 6!)
A quick conversion for total cost inc postage;

1
$ 12.95
$ 12.95
EF2000 Version 2 W95/DOS CD KA

1
$ 2.00
$ 2.00
Shipping & Handling Per Order

1
$ 3.50
$ 3.50
Shipping & Handling Per Shipment


1
$ 6.50
$ 6.50
Shipping & Handling Per Item


$ 24.95
Total

It would cost you 17.61 all in inc postage handling etc to England

It's in stock as of today -Wed 11/7

Don't say i'm not good to you

Tracer




------------------
"Flying is the second hardest thing known to man.........the first is landing!"

#561678 - 07/11/01 01:22 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Thanks - I bought it from here last night

Cheers,
Manteau

#561679 - 07/11/01 01:49 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Size vs. Density...

I think this is still a critical factor in game design with /any kind/ of realistic terrain modelling. How many CD's did you want this map to be placed on anywho?

JF-18 for instance looks like crap and only takes up about the top righthand most corner grid.

For myself, the difference between 'satellite real' mapped hex A and B is not so important as the 'visual feel' when I get there.

I think this latter might also be important because flying a penetrating mission clear through the former WARPAC countries, even at Mach 1 will take _forever_.

But if you just 'dropped right in' to the Swiss Alps or a reasonable facsimile of the Baltic, you would never have to generate a 'real' map of all of NW Europe. Only an active sector of it.

This is how I handled my USAFE game. You picked an area of NORTHAG/CENTAG corresponding to a given number of AB's (A-10 FOL's and deployed F-15 bases) and that was your mission allocation area for that combat resolution 'turn'.

The F-111 and F-4E PTack which I had tentatively planned would have run on a similar system of 'hyperspace' to a given point, after which you faced an increasing likelihood of intercept X-distance from target based on the overall depth of the profile and the success of the CAir war.

I still say that, unless you plan on letting the damn EE'rs get carried away with themselves, Europe is a -dead- battleground.

1970's-80's machines are one thing but the Typhoon is a 2000's machine and should be applied to theatres where there is a reasonable chance of engagement.

Australia vs. a China/Indonesia 'pact' for instance or Saudi Typhoons fighting an Iraq-vs.-Iran Pt. Deux 'stabilization effort' (don't bomb MY oil tanker/wells etc.) and then (after Iran almost certainly wins), going on to fight a conglomerate state that basically controls the whole of the Northern Gulf and is the equal (or with Kuwait, the greater) of Saudi Arabia on the OPEC council.

You could even include 'branching' campaigns such as an Iranian supported revolution up through the Arab republics and even Chechnya.

Further West, how about a replay of _Warriors_ but with Typhoons instead of F-20's facing off against the IDFAF after a Major Blowup of the Palestinian Problem led to active warfare/occupation between Jordan and Israel and an 'Arab Coalition' intervention.

I would even go for 'Greece vs. Israel/Turkey' over the pissant islands off each others coasts (and Cyprus of course).

But jeeze people. Not all of us were born under grey twilit skies (I certainly don't get off on them) and not all of us have an obsession with kicking a bunch of poor as church mice, down-to-their-knees, atomics and nothing else, 'Superpower' Russians.

Hell, it may even go further back to some kind of WWII fixation for all I know but whatever, "Let's take it outside". The European bar room has had enough brawling fun for one century.


Kurt Plummer

#561680 - 07/11/01 03:48 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


To Gavin and all .

that map is awesome , and got my mind a racing -

is that map , approx the same size geog area as the countries in TAW ?

PERSONALLY , i am sick of non modding , and sick of all the potential sims / modding that could happen , that never comes about -

i have a radical idea , lets take the TAW engine , and make this theatre ourselves !

we need someone somewhere with talent to cough - hack the taw engine - it must be possible ??

then we could do a robin hood / falcon 4 , and build our own theatre !

there are talented people out there , with skills , ideas and drive , we could do this if the will was there ! ??

Taw gfx , are still tops , the map above would look awsome , its big , but TAW could do it , specially with current cpu's and 3d gfx cards .

Might have to trim a few areas around the edges , but im sure we could get scandinavia , northern europe , and uk / iceland etc in !

what do you guys think ????

frankly there is a whole raft of sims , where people ask / plead with the developer for help / tools and modding and nothing is forthcoming - even flashpoint is starting to look like going the same way

so maybe we should just seize the opportunity and organise ourselves and have a go , what have we got to loose ??

maybe we could offer a finacial reward for some TAW tools , eg tiling stuff , mission builder etc ?

if nothing else it would liven up the TAW forum ?

Re Tyhoon , i still live in hope of campaign open up and mission builder , so im reserving judgement on that for time being , but frankly , modding sims is the way to go , lets stop bitching and improve things for all !

if we get no help / support , then fook it , lets try it ourselves anyway !


#561681 - 07/11/01 04:06 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


I think a surprising amount could be done if we could work out the .dat format.

I've spent ages trying to work out the format, and I haven't managed it.

The files aren't encrypted or compressed, the binary files are just mapped sequentially to the file - I can't see any file sizes though, so there must be an index somewhere.

Cheers,
Manteau

#561682 - 07/11/01 04:24 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Kurt,

For once, this is one area where I don't care about realism.

I'd far rather something in my own back yard and something that has more relevance to me.

Even if the scenario isn't that realistic - think about it:

* Russia invades the Baltic states (Belarus, Lithuania)

* Nato move fighters into German airbases

* NATO bring troops over to Germany

* You could fly as British, German and Italian Typhoons on CAPS

* Possibly NATO may fight back rather than just defend

* RAF patrols over the north sea off Scotland - e.g. against bear bombers, Tu-22Ms, etc

* Escorting Nimrods over the north sea

* Russia invades Finland (even if they are neutral - possibly Sweden as well)

* We're back to Norway again - huge NATO presence there

* US Carrier fleet in North Sea

* The Brits bring their two new carriers with Typhoons/JSF into play (they would have already - possibly bring them into Baltic sea - don't know if this is possible sealane wise in Denmark)

* Russian fighters/bombers cross to Poland

* Land army invade Poland

* NATO steps in forcefully

etc, etc,

Come on, that's half of what the scenario of Typhoon is anyway, but in Typhoon YOUR action was centred on Iceland - just expand the theatre so you're involved in the whole war.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again - I would be prepared to pay over 60 for a game that let me did this, with different campaigns, a whole theatre like this with multitudes of realistic missions to fly, and a TAW style campaign interface that let you control and tweak things.

Cheers,
Manteau

[This message has been edited by Manteau (edited 07-11-2001).]

#561683 - 07/11/01 04:53 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Quote:
Originally posted by 3dfxboy:
maybe we could offer a finacial reward for some TAW tools , eg tiling stuff , mission builder etc ?


I'd do it for free if I could. I'd PAY to have some more detailed info on the format of the files (not as much as I would for an actual game though ) if it helped in the long run.

LOL - maybe we could bribe Steve Hunt for the tools (and source code - only joking ).

How's 300 sound, Steve?

On the other hand, looks like BoB's source code is going to be made available...

Cheers,
Manteau

#561684 - 07/11/01 05:13 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


I've mentioned this before, but there is a great little book every god fearing EF2000 fan should read, its called
Total War 2006.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0340748567/o/qid=994867894/sr=8-1/026-6489041-6546835

It's interesting; i do not agree with the poltics of it, but it is still a good read. Especially cool is the sequence where the RAF Typhoons are fighting for air superiority over the Baltic and the NATO race for Estonia.

Anyway, the writer wrote the book as a thesis for the Luftwaffe staff college, and he knows what he's talking about.

Gavin

#561685 - 07/11/01 05:20 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Quote:
Originally posted by Gavin Bennett:
I've mentioned this before, but there is a great little book every god fearing EF2000 fan should read, its called
Total War 2006.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0340748567/o/qid=994867894/sr=8-1/026-6 489041-6546835

It's interesting; i do not agree with the poltics of it, but it is still a good read. Especially cool is the sequence where the RAF Typhoons are fighting for air superiority over the Baltic and the NATO race for Estonia.

Anyway, the writer wrote the book as a thesis for the Luftwaffe staff college, and he knows what he's talking about.

Gavin


LOL - I've just bought it - 6 - half the price of EF2000 2.0

Something different to do at least.

Cheers,
Manteau

#561686 - 07/11/01 05:37 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Further thoughts.

The trick would be using DEM data and satelite photography to establish "macro textures."

So we have an accurate, but not particularly detailed terrain set.

Then, you detail the areas of interest.

Say Typhoon 2 - Total Air War comes out, and comes with -say - five campaigns.

Norway
Iceland
The Baltic States.
Poland.
GIUK.

You texture Norway, and some of Sweden, Finland and Russia with better, indepth, realistic (Falcon 4 - like, maybe) textures.

Do the same for Iceland, Poland, and Scotland. You can still fly over all of those other areas, but the textures are not as involving. But in the campaign areas, the texturing is great. (USAF used a similar trick)

Then, when we all start complaining, you release another package, detailing another facet of the war, perhaps a Russian armoured thrust into Germany. You then texture Germany. The elevation data is already there, and the basic texturing is done...so, you have just to make some hi-res Germany textures.

And so on.

And this would be a DID sim. It would reek atmosphere. It would have it in droves. Even Typhoon with its motherlands and its lack of drag modelling has plenty of atmosphere.

The cut scenes can be optional.

Perhaps a bunch of different ways to play.

TAW style god's eye AWACS view, that allows you to jump into any allied Eurofighter in your area of responsibility.

Single pilot based campaign. You choose a squadron, which is then assigned to a theatre (eg, you choose to be a Luftwaffe Typhoon pilot, and get sent to defend Lithuania) and you fly missions as that pilot, only. Optional cut scenes. You fly missions assigned to your squadron ala Falcon 4.

Typhoon style pilot control. Same thing, writ large.

And finally, an EF2000 style fly any assigned mission in the area of responsbility.

This would be the best of both worlds. The joyriders amongst us could just fly around the theatre and be amused. The campaigns themselves do not have to all go on at once. Rather, the campaigns happen where they happen, and the computer makes decisions as to what might be going on in Iceland, for example.

Of course, an ultimate release could feature, a fully textured, fully realised theatre, with every campaign going on at once, on a massively multiplay pay for play server, with the events of one directly effecting the events of all in real time.

:-)

Gavin

#561687 - 07/11/01 09:58 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Well the thing that I dont like about those Rage people, is that they somehow found a way to send the giant kung-fu ninja monkeys to my house to try to attack my pet wooden chicken that really thinks he is a titianium, radioactive godzilla! They always attack me on Sunday nights on Friday afternoons....damnedest thing I have ever seen. Then after they attack I usually try to find a way to get up to Burger King.

#561688 - 07/11/01 10:03 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Man, you have issues Sandman!

LMAO!

------------------
Brian "Raptor" Robinson,CO. CMACG
http://www.cmacg-wings-of-fury.com

#561689 - 07/12/01 11:17 AM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


I've said it before, and I'll say it again - I would be prepared to pay over 60 for a game that let me did this...

The games industry tried this a few years back. Origin started jacking up the prices of its games before Christmas, putting them on multiple CDs, lots of extra features, etc, etc. Sales were not so good! This is not a sustainable business model for games publishers unless they have a monopoly on the market (as in the console market). Microsoft managed it with FS2000 (and FS2002), but that's because they know that the sales will be huge - in the millions of copies - and they have enough people. There are easily 100+ people (probably 200+) developing and testing FS2000/2002.

You must understand the economics of the games industry - remember this is now worth more than Hollywood. Publishers are interested in MAKING MONEY - full stop. Flight simmers are a minority. Sad but ture. The only way flight simulations will continue to be developed is if they become more mass-market, which I believe they can be.

With a group of 10 developers, say, and a budget of $1 million, do you:

(a) Develop a hardcore flight sim that sells maybe 100,000 copies?

(b) Develop a console game that sells 1,000,000 copies?

(c) Develop a flight sim that is easily accesible, and maybe sell 300,000 copies?

Most execs would go for (b) - and they are. Look at Razorworks, the sequel to EECH will be a console game.

(a) will give you zero profit, and that's if you achieve reasonable sales.

(c) is a compromise, EFT, but at least covers costs and makes some profit, and stands the chance of growing the flight sim market so that (a) becomes feasible in the future.

Developing good flight sims takes a long time. Look at B17, that ran into $3-4 million in development I believe. I do not know if it has turned a profit, but I severely doubt it. Doesn't make much of an argument for making a sequel, does it?

EFT on the other hand is achieving excellent sales in the UK, topping the games charts. That gives the developers a great argument for a sequel, in the knowledge that next time they might be able to add more functionality. Once the game engine is done then that allows them to concentrate on 'fancier' features. Good luck to them. Don't knock them too much or else you might see the whole flight sim genre get buried by the boardroom execs who are only interested in their balance sheets!!!

Thanks for listening
Kenji
PC Pilot and Gamespot UK

#561690 - 07/12/01 11:40 AM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Fair enough - you've made some excellent points, and I admit that it does make sense from a developer's point of view to make games for the mass market.

But as for the price of games - you're in the industry, so you're in the know, but - why can't games be sold like software - the more features they have, the more options to customise them to your likes, then the more expensive they are.

Therefore, games like F4 / JFA-18 / Flanker would be hardcore, and so could sell for around 40. Okay, it's a lot fewer people interested in them, but I recon they'd buy them for that price.

Then you have the things like Typhoon, available for around 30.

Just pontificating - I've got no answers, just ideas

Cheers,
Manteau

#561691 - 07/12/01 01:20 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 604
Uroboros Offline
Member
Uroboros  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 604
Brooklyn, NY
ktakeda makes some good points...glad you see the logic in them.

But you idea makes sense too. But a sim developer would probably have to come out before the project started and see whether or not the idea would sell with the sim crowd. Something like

"..hey we're planning on making a sim with this..this and this feature; would you be willing to pay $75 for it? How bout $100"

Maybe some future sim developer who really want so to write sims, but also wants to make some money in the process (and why not )..will consider going that route.

#561692 - 07/12/01 04:35 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


I remember Kenji's articles on flight simming back in the day. Welcome aboard. Don't mind us bitching.

I definitely think DID/Rage should be considering a post carrier-ops expansion to Typhoon. A full scale sequel. We in the group tend to call it Typhoon 2 - TAW2, but it would need a catchier title.

The trick would be to target the people who bought EF2000. All of them. And target the people who bought Typhoon. All of them. And the people who bought ADF. All of them too. And have something for everyone.

I am thinking two or three gameplay modes.

Typhoon mode. Fly with Typhoon style avionics, flight model and so on. Only with better weapons models :-) Cut scenes and so on. Refuelling is automatic and the AWACS sends displays to your JTIDS.
TAW mode. Fly with EF2000 style avionics, in a better cockpit, with drag modelling, working TIALD and DASS. Refuelling is manual, and although the AWACS sends data to your JTIDS, it also vectors you vocally.

Oh and some sort of pay per play massively multiplayer mode.

:-)


Gavin

#561693 - 07/12/01 08:27 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Manteau,

You Wrote:

>>
Kurt,

For once, this is one area where I don't care about realism.

I'd far rather something in my own back yard and something that has more relevance to me.

Even if the scenario isn't that realistic - think about it:

* Russia invades the Baltic states (Belarus, Lithuania)
>>

Why? Were extensive reserves of Power PC Chips discovered there?

>>
* Nato move fighters into German airbases
>>

Why? NATO already has fighters in Germany and those fighters are almost a 700nm from the targets that would effect an invasion of the former Baltic States.

>>
* NATO bring troops over to Germany
>>

Why? You invade Russia and you catch a nuke in the teeth. Doesn't have to be a big nuke but a nuke on their soil is completely within their rights.

>>
* You could fly as British, German and Italian Typhoons on CAPS
>>

Okay, but a CAP is a 1,001 circles 'bored' in the sky. They mean nothing to a force you are intending to prevent from invading and if you wait ala Serbia and Desert Storm, it will be fait d'accompli.

>>
* Possibly NATO may fight back rather than just defend
>>

I think so. Russia want's Russia takes. If we intend to provide security for the Baltic States as Clinton 'promised, just short of NATO', there is no way in hell we can do it from within NATO's bounds. Defensively or politically. I wonder what Germans think of whacking that Bear in the nuts with sticks based in their territory? Is Poland ready to take the German's place?

>>
* RAF patrols over the north sea off Scotland - e.g. against bear bombers, Tu-22Ms, etc
>>

Why would Russia attack England over battlefield and transport node concentrations a 1,000nm eastwards? Is France refusing passage of forces? It makes no sense to attack Reforger when all of this is going to be over before we get there and considering how gutted our own CONUS levels are. You've _got the best already_.

OTOH, this LINK-
http://mylima.com/airforce/qr.htm

Seems to state that there are 100 Backfire, 80 Bear and 13 Blackjack still flying.

If I have so few assets (and probably fewer cruise to arm them with) I will NOT be wasting them on multihour blue water transits over a Blue Force dominated battlespace. 1 AEGIS missile trap and my strategic power projection is /gone/.

OTOH, with whatever Kh-55/65/101 I can actually muster, I can still fire missiles from the top of the Kola or the 'far side of Engels' and hit any damn target I want from Germany East.

>>
* Escorting Nimrods over the north sea
>>

For What Reason? Pirating Scandinavian porn again?

>>
* Russia invades Finland (even if they are neutral - possibly Sweden as well)
>>

Hell, if they want that peace of real estate, I've sure got some prime swampland in the South of Florida for them.

From a peak of about 200, the Russians are lucky to put together a single division these days. They suffered a 1,000 deaths and nearly 800 dissertions from causes ranging to bizerk hazing rituals to No Food and No Heat.
Now you want them to replay Barbarossa, backwards, for crap territorial gains?

I isolate their transport gas and they will be /begging me/ for the right to _walk back_ home and starve as opposed to freeze.
Then we can talk about decreasing the wheat dole for all those civillians we feed.

You want revolution? Whupp there it is.

>>
* We're back to Norway again - huge NATO presence there
>>

If you say so. I'd rather backstroke through a swimming pool full of rattlesnakes than freeze my butt off pretending Norway has more than fish to my penguin act.

>>
* US Carrier fleet in North Sea
>>

Why? When I can put Cruise into Kola without crossing the 60th parallel on /either side/ of the globe.

>>
* The Brits bring their two new carriers with Typhoons/JSF into play (they would have already - possibly bring them into Baltic sea - don't know if this is possible sealane wise in Denmark)
>>

'Welcome to my bathtub' said the mine to the moron.

Better your decks than mine I guess.

>>
* Russian fighters/bombers cross to Poland
>>

The Russians have about 450 Su-24 and 180 Su-25. Perhaps '500' MiG-29. Most of these are split across CIS gaps so large that it would indeed take a new revolution to bring them back in.

On an 'any given daily' operations basis, I would guestimate that you can divide that by ten on all airframes (of mixed type/series run) for 'parts and labour' to get running.
say fifty for each tacair and 20 for each strategic type.

And then there's gas.

/Old Hand/ (RHIP) Russian pilots average 50-70hrs a _year_ flying these machines, because they cannot pay for fuel and/or have to trade it on a food:flight hours basis. Fresh-from-training, novices get less than 20.

They have ZERO experience in independent force projection and were /always/ interdiction targeted to fixed force concentrations (the Belgian and French ports, our prepositioned and nuclear depot stores etc.) and in direct support of the frontal forces.

You have all our forces massed in Germany. 600 miles out and an AMRAAM for each one vs.
50-80 planes of each type.

Better them than me brudda.

>>
* Land army invade Poland
>>

Which Mongol Hun are your gonna hire?

>>
* NATO steps in forcefully
>>

Oooooh, Go Ahead daddy, /spank me/. I'll just press the little Red Button and then pull down my trousers shall I?

Russia is a superpower ONLY by virtue of her nuclear might. That is the reason that her nuclear arsenal is the ONLY thing she has continued to modernize.

Our entire reason for NATO-being was defensive. You want us to go into former Russian colonial provinces and 'protect ourselves' by kicking the crap out of Russian armed invasion by all of two peasants and a mule (for eating) in their own backyard?

That sure puts the lie to the 'Honorable Defense' now don't it?

And the Russians are bloody minded bastards who would (and have, repeatedly) blown up what they perceive to be 'their own country' rather than hand it over to an 'outside' invasion force.

Very clannish, very close minded, very Razed Earthish. Few other options.

You don't push a desparate killer into a corner with a stick of uranium and a polonium blasting cap and No Other Options.

>>
Come on, that's half of what the scenario of Typhoon is anyway, but in Typhoon YOUR action was centred on Iceland - just expand the theatre so you're involved in the whole war.
>>

I guess one of the reasons the U.S. is a global power is that we realize there is more to the world than Europe. 'Or even Iceland'.

I guess one of the reasons Europe ain't is that she is all too prepared to spread-leg impale herself in pursuit of dulce et decorem est 'glory' on her own soils.

Weird.

I take a dump in the bathroom and I've been known to pop off a few on the range but I don't invite people to cap off a clip in my bathroom nor do I crawl over the gunrest to evacuate my bowels when the range master looks up and down the line and says "Ready, At Will...FIRE!" (though I might do so, involuntarily, if the situation were forced upon me...;-)

European nature seems to be inherently bent to exactly that kind of masochistic exposure trauma.

Because it is 'relevant to them'???

Oh Freud, "Ahm So Cunfoosed!".

>>
I've said it before, and I'll say it again - I would be prepared to pay over 60 for a game that let me did this, with different campaigns, a whole theatre like this with multitudes of realistic missions to fly, and a TAW style campaign interface that let you control and tweak things.
>>

Then do it the 'old fashioned way' with WARPAC era weapons systems against an opponent driven insane by listening to a litany of 70-years-a-corpse dogma.

If there is one thing technology warfare should have taught us 'buy now' it is that airpower show-sports are for third world wannabes 'fighting' a game they don't even realize they are blood-stooge players in.

You get serious and it comes down to missiles fired from beyond ANY reasonable expectation of tactical 'airpower' to have any effect whatsoever.

Getting mired in a New Revolution Russia, 2006, is exactly that kind of Hell's Bells and Bifrost's Horn scenario.


Cheers, Manteau


You too sir...KP

#561694 - 07/12/01 09:08 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 2
Vaider-Raider Offline
Junior Member
Vaider-Raider  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: May 2006
Posts: 2
I dont have much to say on this.... most people seem to have made some VERY good points..

1. this is just a theory... but if a flightsim came out @ 80 wouldn't the mass market expect it to be atleast twice as good as the leading 30-40 one ?

2. I strongly believe that D.I.D are capable of making an excellent flightsim... they proved that with the help of Ocean... I'm not so sure after Rages efforts if its possible with the current handshaking... I mean how many of rages games haven't been arcadey and for the mass market? *g* we could possibly assume that d.i.d had that wargasm sparkle in their eye before Rage took over? was it a management decision or a developers design decision to churn it out the way it was?

I just feel that D.I.Ds ideas were somewhat different from Rages in the beginning (looking at the engine in general)and that Rage put their foot down as to what the final result was in the end.... take away the graphics and a little of the gameplay and I believe that this game could have sucked c*ck completely... but werent we all in awe of the graphics and smoothness in the beginning?

If I wanted a game like this I would have bought Freespace 2 *G*

motto of the day:
"NEVER judge a book by its cover"

take care



[This message has been edited by Vaider-Raider (edited 07-12-2001).]

#561695 - 07/12/01 09:09 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 2
Vaider-Raider Offline
Junior Member
Vaider-Raider  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: May 2006
Posts: 2
Of for gods sake lol...

another post???????

*GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR*

hmmmmm

[This message has been edited by Vaider-Raider (edited 07-12-2001).]

#561696 - 07/12/01 09:09 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 2
Vaider-Raider Offline
Junior Member
Vaider-Raider  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: May 2006
Posts: 2
no point reading my crap twice *S*

(double post)



[This message has been edited by Vaider-Raider (edited 07-12-2001).]

#561697 - 07/13/01 11:20 AM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


I remember Kenji's articles on flight simming back in the day. Welcome aboard. Don't mind us bitching.

Thanks Gavin, nice to chat with some fellow minded folks on here Please don't mind my ranting from time to time, it's what the games industry does to you after too long

Cheers,
Kenji

#561698 - 07/13/01 02:05 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,364
Tracer[formerly of CS] Offline
Senior Member
Tracer[formerly of CS]  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,364
Kurt, in reply to your post about "NATO still having fighter's in Germany"
I heard that NATO pulled out it's *last* squadron of fighter's a couple of weeks ago and dispersed them around England.

As far as i know there is no NATO presence in Germany now

http://www.raf.mod.uk/stations/os_base.html

Quote:
RAF Bruggen, Germany
RAF Bruggen was named originally after the nearest railhead, in the North Rhein Westphalia village of Bruggen; however, it is actually situated just outside the village of Elmpt some 6km away. RAF Bruggen is home to the Royal Air Force Tornado Wing in Germany and the Station was constructed on drained marshland within a heavily forested area in the remarkably short time of 12 months (July 1952-July 1953). This short construction phase was a direct result of the need to house the rapidly expanding NATO forces in the early fifties. The Station's history can be divided into three periods; 1953-1957 when it operated as a fighter station; 1967 until 1998, operating in the strike/attack role; from April 1998 the Station has operated in the attack role.

During the fighter phase, No 23 Sqn Belgian Air Force and No's 67, 71, 112 and 130 Squadrons Royal Air Force operated from Bruggen. Bruggen became a predominantly Canberra station with the arrival of No's 80 and 213 Squadrons in the summer of 1957. From 1969 to 1975 the Station operated Phantoms in the strike/attack role, before changing their role to the Jaguar in 1975. Royal Air Force Bruggen underwent a complete change of aircraft between 1984 and 1987 with the Jaguar Squadrons being replaced by Tornado Squadrons. The base celebrated its 40th anniversary in 1993, and is currently the largest Tornado base in NATO. 17(F) Sqn disbanded on the 31 Mar 99 as a result of the Strategic Defence Review.

It is at present home to 2 RAF Tornado GR1 attack squadrons (IX(B) and 31 Squadrons), both of which took part in the Gulf War in 1991. The 2 Tornado Squadrons are declared to NATO as Main Defence Forces and Reaction Force (Air) assets. RAF Bruggen was tasked by NATO to mount offensive air operations against the Former Republic of Yugoslavia on the 28 Mar 99. The historic first mission from RAF Bruggen consisted of 6 Tornado GR1s and 3 VC10 tankers and was launched on 4 Apr 99. RAF Bruggen is also home to Rapier surface-to-air missile Sqn, 37 Sqn RAF Regiment and 12 Flt Army Air Corps. 37 Sqn RAF Regiment forms part of the UK contribution to the Immediate Reaction Force (Air).

RAF Bruggen is commanded by an Air Commodore, who holds the title Senior RAF Officer Germany. Bruggen consists of four operational Squadrons (three Tornado and one Rapier) supported by the usual three Wing structure - Operations, Engineering and Supply and Administration. The supporting wings are each commanded by a Wing Commander. Operations Wing is responsible for supporting the airfield's operational capability and includes such services as Air Traffic Control, Intelligence and Meteorological Forecasting. Engineering and Supply Wing is responsible for second-line work on Tomados and also supplies motor transport, ground equipment, general engineering support and all supplies for the Station. Administration Wing provides the wide ranging support services which are required for a station of this kind. It contains Squadrons dealing with personnel management, property management, security, medical, dental, catering and training.

At the end of March 1999, RAF Bruggen's population included 222 RAF officers and 1,881 airmen, 55 members of the other services and 590 civilian employees. When some 3,452 dependant personnel are included, the total population of RAF Bruggen was 6,100.

The last act of Bruggen's illustrious history was acted out in June 2001 when a parade was held to mark the official closure of the station, thus bringing an end to the last remnants of the RAF's cold war past. The Tornado squadrons will return to the UK before the base is handed over to German authorities.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RAF Rheindahlen, Germany
Originally the administrative support centre for the 2nd Tactical Air Force and other units based in Germany and the Netherlands, RAF Rheindahlen was disbanded in 1993 and became the Rheindahlen Support Unit when it amalgamated with the Garrison. Today, the Station houses the Joint Support Unit and the Band of the RAF in Germany. With the closure of all RAF bases in Germany, Rheindahlen will shortly be handed across to the German authorities.



Tracer

------------------
"Flying is the second hardest thing known to man.........the first is landing!"

[This message has been edited by Tracer[formerly of CS] (edited 07-13-2001).]

#561699 - 07/13/01 08:59 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Tracer,

Chuckle.

Though I'm sure they appreciate the 'vote of confidence', RAFG is NOT 'NATO'. But rather a commitment of UK aircraft to the NATO tasking OOB. Leaving Germany does not remand their responsibility to generate sorties for NATO, only perhaps the local operational control and roles/missions under which those tasked aircraft fly.

Indeed, so long as the Luftwaffe doesn't pull another Angland Blitz and in pursuit of British Beer and those fine Welsh Women (bbaaaaaaah-d joke!;-) I keep hearing about there will /always/ be 'NATO fighters in Germany'.

There are also USAFE 'NATO' (commited) fighters at Spang and for that matter there will soon be 'NATO fighters' in Hungary, Poland and perhaps the Czech Republic.

Britain has to pay a 10 billion pound overdraft in her lump summed R&D and new-system purchases. Scaling back excessively restricted operations in an area without any valid contemporary war threat is one of the least difficult of many choices the UK defense ministry is facing.

Deciding on F.3, GR.3 or SHAR-2 type retirements is far more important to UK 'NATO' commited force realignments for instance.


Nice Article though, brings back all sorts of teary mem-o-ries...KP

#561700 - 07/13/01 09:23 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Kenji,

There are at least three points where your argument just goes to pieces:

1. B-17 was /promised/ to be more than it was. It fell down badly and so that 3-4 million is more a case of bad investment in the development team prowess than good investment for a bad return. We here all kinds of 'They were instructed to chop out this that and the other' from /board level/ management so the question can be 50:50'd for responsibility but to be honest, 8-12hrs in a Bomber-anything is just a little much for my tastes and if you increase the number of times you get taken under fire you end up skewing the effects of the mission to a 'Memphis Belle' level of idiocy. Bad platform choice, bad execution = Just Plain Baaaaad.

2. ALL games are moving towards more detail, more 'feel of being there as a person' realitization.

RPG's are among the most competitive in this because again there are so many out there (and they /do/ sell) that a good, continuing, world-plotline loyalty is essential.

Backing off to an EFT level of snide 'keeps them in the pool hall' immersion is just not going to cut it and you cannot pretend we are oversaturated because we aren't.

Bad quality begets bad sales and where you fail to realize that 'simulation' of combat aircraft means _simulation of war_ at the grande strategic level, you can never have the kind of Faited Decision Making interest that equates to storytelling in the other, humanist, game genres.

3. $$ to Dumbass.

I ain't no sheep. Stop wooling me! If the executive level of decision making is to do a 300,000 copy game then that is what their next decision making choice is going to be too.

You can forget 'addons and expansions' that make the game 'more realistic'. They may use the maths from one games engine but they won't rewrite that engines campaign interactions to reflect 'a deep and abiding desire' for something better than the crap that sells today.

Where you have a limited total-span engine life (and to me, Typhoon is not all that great a shakes, graphically, over it's predecessors) you push out as many 'sequels' as you can before it's eyecandy appears dated.

As long as we bleat up to the credit card bar you don't take the time to 'enrich our experience' you just put in a few new Motherland Boss Levels, shell out for some different packaging and call it 'NEW, IMPROVED, BAAAAAHTTER!'.

Giving companies that are in the sim industry only to make money a free hand to do so on a 'sequel will be better' basis only ensures that we lose. All the time, every time, without remit or remonstrance.

Or a better sequel.

Because they've already proven they can do /better/ five-six years ago.

Reverse Polish 'Bell' Learning Curves don't go Ka-ching-a-ling-a-ling, they go CLUNK CLUNK CLUNKER.

Unless you're IQ is lower than that of the sales effort trying to convince you that it's 'okay' to be commercial sheep.


KP

#561701 - 07/13/01 11:26 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2
Tiger Offline
Junior Member
Tiger  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2
Quote:
Originally posted by Kurt Plummer:
Kenji,

There are at least three points where your argument just goes to pieces:

KP


I'm impressed! Kurt is not only able to talk nonsense about aircombat, it seems he can talk total nonsense about almost anything.

Tig


Tiger
#561702 - 07/15/01 05:30 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 2
Vaider-Raider Offline
Junior Member
Vaider-Raider  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: May 2006
Posts: 2
Quote:
Originally posted by Tiger:
I'm impressed! Kurt is not only able to talk nonsense about aircombat, it seems he can talk total nonsense about almost anything.

Tig


*lol* for once I have to agree with Kurt Tig,

Microshaft is one of the best examples of making customers say

"hey you have windows 10,001 I need to get it too !!! "

as I said in a past thread $1 BILLION in marketing Windows Xp will almost convince anyone they should buy that O/S

My bet is 60% of the sales of Typhoon were based on the sucess of its predocessors... what happens when they play it for a few weeks and realise that their godly sim is nothing more than a fictional arcade game?

I have to give credit to Rage for this marketing... WinMe was bought by the masses before they realised it was just a slower win98 with newer drivers, what happened ? Microsofty keeps the cash !. I SEROUSLY doubt that Typhoon II will sell nearly as well as the first if it EVER comes out..

Ian.




------------------
Vaider-Raider

"I'm right here,
because I'm not all there"

#561703 - 07/19/01 10:48 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 39
stephenwhite Offline
Junior Member
stephenwhite  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: May 2001
Posts: 39
Macclesfield, Cheshire, Englan...
Manteau, stop it, please stop it. Just stop it! You're starting to sound like Mr. Cadbury's Parrot.

Stephen White

#561704 - 07/20/01 01:49 AM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 51
Gel214th Offline
Junior Member
Gel214th  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 51
Quote:
Originally posted by stephenwhite:
Manteau, stop it, please stop it. Just stop it! You're starting to sound like Mr. Cadbury's Parrot.

Stephen White


Surprised by Manteau's post myself. I've not been to the boards in a little while..and yup I see him posting the same things he posted when the game was first released

Manteau..I thought all this was said by you ad infinitum and you had gone onto TAW again etc. etc. ?

Why'd you choose to..errrm..revisit the topic yet again?



------------------
-Gel214th
CO 214th Annihilators

http://www.214th.com/flanker2


-Gel214th
#561705 - 07/20/01 02:56 AM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Actually, allow me to interject.

I think the problem, the main, screaming, in your face problem with Typhoon is...it is a sequel to EF2000.

(And F-22 ADF and TAW)

And we simmers, here on this board are NOT judging it on its merits. We are not judging it on its cool sounds. We are not judging it on its intense gameplay. We are not judging it on its cool sky textures, or its beautiful 3d model of the Typhoon. We are not judging it on the cool smart view dogfights, or how the programmers went to all the trouble of modelling all the AI planes so well. (cough, cough, Falcon, cough, cough, F/A-18, cough)

We don't, because EF2000 (and TAW) have a deep and abiding and emotional respect in our hearts.

EF2000 was the best selling sim ever. And many of us would judge it still the best. It comes neck and neck with F/A-18 and Falcon 4 in my esteem. And EF2000 came out in 1995!!! And time makes us forget the little problems with EF2000 - you could durandal a runway, and the Su-35s could still take off. Hosting a MP game, your plane would explode, on occassion. Your wingmen could be as thick as two bricks, and I rarely brought them home.

I personally harassed the DID staff long and hard with notions for Typhoon when the thing was in development. I even was asked to research pictures of broken airplanes to help the graphic artists. I wasn't that useful, but it was a cool thing to do. I was so excited to get my mitts on the box, finally. I got my father to post the damn thing from ireland.

The parallel I think of, is Falcon V. When Falcon V was released, I expected celebrations, but instead there were a LOT of very negative comments, and even weird theories. This is because someone was going to do something, and perhaps something different, to a game that is dear to our hearts.

And I love Typhoon. But the whines, and the moans and the complaints and the wishlists here reflect our hope for something that would better EF2000. Ironically, Typhoon fixes three of the biggest complaints about EF2000 - resolution, a 24 hour campaign clock, and no more re-spawning of planes. Strafed planes on runway, STAY strafed. :-)

Now if only the plane didn't go so fast, the Meteors actually worked like the RAF might expect them to, and the Brimstones hit things...:-) (And we were flying over Norway :-))

:-)

That is why everyone here has some pet peeve. And its not because we are gullable, or thumb suckers. (well...ehm, anyway :-))

:-)

Gavin

[This message has been edited by Gavin Bennett (edited 07-19-2001).]

#561706 - 07/22/01 12:19 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2
Tiger Offline
Junior Member
Tiger  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2
Quote:
Originally posted by Gavin Bennett:
Now if only the plane didn't go so fast, the Meteors actually worked like the RAF might expect them to, and the Brimstones hit things...:-)


1)
The Eurofighter in Typhoon is actually slower than the one in EF2000.

2)
The Meteors appear to be working very well for me. I've been getting about a 60% success rate with the long range version, and that's probably too high if you compare it with the success of real world missiles. Also things rarely work as Air Forces expect them to

3)
It appears to me that the Brimstones do hit things 90% of the time. It just takes two for a kill. Everyone knows that's not quite realistic but it was a design decision that Steve explained in a message here, deal with it.

Tig


Tiger
#561707 - 07/22/01 03:07 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Actually, no, the Typhoon in Eurofighter Typhoon is a hell of a lot faster than the one in EF2000

Top speed, full burner, EF2000 @ 10000ft?
Mach 1.2 with loadout. Mach 1.4 (or thereabouts clean)

Mach 1.6 in dive.

Transition from 0 to Mach 1.2/Mach 1.4? Around thirty seconds.

Not very scientific, I know.

Top Speed, full burner, Typhoon @ 10000ft?
Mach 1.6 with loadout. Mach 1.7 or thereabouts clean.

Transition from 0 to Mach 1.6? Around ten seconds.
AND you can do it in a steep climb.

I just checked. Again, this is not very scientific. But there ya go.

The Meteors work maybe 50-60% of the time, true. But we are not given a nice engagement envelope or even a "shoot, shoot command." So its a pretty hit and miss affair. And I have wasted lots of Meteors trying to down one lousy MiG-27. He was heading towards me at 10000ft. And the missile would fly near or past him, but it finally took the ASRAAM to get him.

Gavin

As Jeremy Clarkson would say, this is the souped up coupe version.

#561708 - 07/22/01 05:26 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Quote:
Originally posted by Tiger:
The Eurofighter in Typhoon is actually slower than the one in EF2000.


Is it?

Not from what I can see.

I could post some results like Gavin did, but I doubt they'd mean anything.

As far as I'm concerned, the Typhoon flight model, apart from the lack of drag modelling, is quite realistic - even on the thrust side of things which most people here have said is too powerful - in comparison to some of the other aspects of the game.

The Typhoon pilot I spoke to at Farnborough '98 said that empty, it's probably one of planes with the highest thrust-to-weight ration except for the MiG25.

He said that brakes off to gear up is seven seconds with a light load of weapons. I can do that in Typhoon - I can't in EF2000.

He also said that from 250 knots, Typhoon can accelerate straight up vertically. I don't know about the loads in this situation, but I can also do this in Typhoon, and to a lesser extent in EF2000.

Cheers,
Manteau

#561709 - 07/22/01 06:37 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2
Tiger Offline
Junior Member
Tiger  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2
Quote:
Originally posted by Gavin Bennett:
Actually, no, the Typhoon in Eurofighter Typhoon is a hell of a lot faster than the one in EF2000


Actually, no, the Eurofighter in EF2K is a hell of a lot faster than the one in Typhoon!! In EF2K v2 I could get it over Mach 2 with ease in level flight, Typhoon won't go near that.

Quote:
EF2000 @ 10000ft? Mach 1.4 (or thereabouts clean)


It actually goes slightly faster than that.

Quote:
Top Speed, full burner, Typhoon @ 10000ft? Mach 1.7 or thereabouts clean.


That must be a pretty big "or thereabouts" because I can't get it to go over Mach 1.47 at that altitude, level flight and clean.


Quote:
Transition from 0 to Mach 1.6? Around ten seconds. AND you can do it in a steep climb.


Yep, just as you can in EF2000, seems almost exactly the same in that respect to me. Must be because of that Ninja powerplant! Only difference is that when you climb to high altitude the EF2000 is much faster than the one in Typhoon.

Quote:
The Meteors work maybe 50-60% of the time, true. But we are not given a nice engagement envelope or even a "shoot, shoot command." So its a pretty hit and miss affair. And I have wasted lots of Meteors trying to down one lousy MiG-27. He was heading towards me at 10000ft. And the missile would fly near or past him, but it finally took the ASRAAM to get him.


Yep, it is really cool when you see those Meteors going for the enemy chaff isn't it!! Really adds to the feeling of being there. You did know the MiGs have countermeasures too, didn't you? Call yourself a Hardcore player, shame on you! I'm just a weekend gamer and I don't have any problem with no stinkin MiG-27.. lol!! And you won't catch me whining like a baby because I miss now and then.

Tig


Tiger
#561710 - 07/22/01 06:42 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2
Tiger Offline
Junior Member
Tiger  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2
Quote:
Originally posted by Manteau:
As far as I'm concerned, the Typhoon flight model, apart from the lack of drag modelling, is quite realistic - even on the thrust side of things which most people here have said is too powerful - in comparison to some of the other aspects of the game.


Typhoon does have drag modelling, at least it seems to go a lot slower with a big A2G load. Surely that's because it has drag modelling?

Tig


Tiger
#561711 - 07/22/01 07:35 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Hmm.
I know the meteor goes after chaff and flares.

And sometimes it doesn't.

And I have been messing with both games all morning to investigate the issue.

And i am still not whining. Its a discussion. And its a discussion about how the game balances itself.

About three years ago, I wrote a big spiel about game balances in flight sims, comparing TAW's dynamic campaign to F-15's semi dynamic campaign.

TAW throws endless supplies of MiGs and Sus and Rafales and Mirages at you to ensure you have a constant challenge, and hence, gameplay, experience.

F-15 on the other hand, has far less enemy aircraft. You may encounter a half dozen in a mission. But F-15 challenges you with avionics, flight model and missile engagement perameters and so on. That's how F-15 balances the gameplay.

And I would argue that the Meteor, better than AMRAAM fancy advanced thingie, is probably artificially less effective, so as to get you into the merge. Others have suggested that the enemy has "better" AAMs. This would suggest to me that this is to discourage you going BVR all the time. Because at that range, he can hit you better than you can hit him. I figured that one out pretty early. So I don't try it so often. And I am sure that eventually, I will know by looking, what the Probability of Kill for the longer range missiles is.

The air to air gameplay is centred around BFM. That is a pretty good design decision, but I would question - not whine about or condemn - that decision. If you have an objective based campaign model, and you want to achieve the allies strategic and tactical aims... you should be much more concerned with the bigger picture, and no dogfights.

Well, using Super EF2000, the max speed after a level flight, clean with sustained afterburners is nowhere near Mach 2. In Typhoon, playing the Helsinki multiplay mission (potentially having different physics because of the multiplay nature of the mission) I hit and sustained Mach 1.7.

As for drag modelling:
Drag is modelled. But its not modelled with the same believability as EF2000 (or A-10 Cuba.., the god of all physics models :-)). Believe me, try dogfighting in EF2000 with a full bomb load and watch yourself get outturned and spanked. As you would in real life. It's a lot more possible in Typhoon.

If you will notice, I am in favour of leaving Typhoon "as-is" as a default mode. however, I would like to see more complex modelling of things like drag and physics, to make the experience more immersive and interesting for people like me.

Now, it is a little rich, for you, as a "weekend gamer" making judgements on my character because I judge something along the lines of a simulation and not as you do. This is _simhq_ after all.

I have been the most vocal supporter of Typhoon since time out of mind. I had my father ship me my copy from Ireland because I wanted it. I had an ex-DID staff member ask me for help researching an aspect of the game, during the development period. So I am quite entitled to make reasonable critical comments about it. Just as you are entitled to defend it. But attacking me will not earn you any particular respect. And it makes your arguements look less valid.
Nothing would make me happier to have Typhoon become a huge success in the United States. However, I constantly carp on about things like the throttle issue, because people are having such problems, and many people will just return the damn thing. And that will not contribute to Steve and the boys getting skiing holidays to Switzerland this year.

Gavin

#561712 - 07/22/01 07:40 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 7
Badboy Offline
Junior Member
Badboy  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 7
UK
Guys,

Allow me to step in here on various performance issues raised by Gavin Bennett, Tiger and Manteau for the purpose of setting the record straight.

Firstly, comparing the speed of different aircraft isnt as straightforward as one might think. However it is normal to quote the top speed for aircraft as the maximum true airspeed that the aircraft can sustain in steady state flight. For jet fighters that speed often occurs close to the upper edge of the troposphere, at approximately 36,000ft depending where you are in the world, it varies. Most simulations however use the international standard atmosphere, but others use standard atmospheres for that part of the world they are simulating.

With that in mind, it is correct to say that the old EF2000 sim had a faster Typhoon. Top speed for it at 36000ft was Mach 2.36 (It also reached Mach 2.5 at 40k) and the new Typhoon top speed is only Mach 1.83. I also suspect that is a more realistic figure, despite the fact that some sources quote as much as Mach 2 at 36,090ft.

Also, Typhoon has a detailed drag model, including the effect of stores etc, right down to the differences in drag resulting from different deflections of the individual control surfaces. In that respect it might indeed be considered superior to the Falcon4 drag model.

Hope that helps.

Badboy

#561713 - 07/22/01 07:53 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Okay, maybe I'm wrong as far as speed is concerned.

But acceleration and thrust seem to be much more powerful in Typhoon.

Cheers,
Manteau

#561714 - 07/22/01 09:03 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Can't argue with that, now can we?
:-)

Ehm, I took all the "speed readings" at 10k. It was a good place, for my way of thinking, since i never stay up high in either EF2000 or Typhoon.

I didn't try and "break" the flight model by accelerating up to the edge of space, or anything.

Now, this took place under Super EF2000. It seems that there are differences between SEF2k, EF2kV2 and plain vanilla EF2000. MAke of that what you will.

Ah well.

Gavin

#561715 - 07/22/01 10:31 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 7
Badboy Offline
Junior Member
Badboy  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 7
UK
Quote:
Originally posted by Manteau:
Okay, maybe I'm wrong as far as speed is concerned.

But acceleration and thrust seem to be much more powerful in Typhoon.

Cheers,
Manteau


They certainly do. Andy and I both agree that it feels a tad too powerful. We have the benefit of a complete set of EM diagrams for the Typhoon and some of the adversary aircraft and the Typhoon's curves of specific excess power are very impressive indeed. When I check the flight model data it all appears to be good, the results are what you see in the sim. I can only wonder if perhaps the real Typhoon feels a tad too powerful also

Badboy

#561716 - 07/23/01 01:23 AM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Part of the reasons of my constant harping on about this, is that a couple of people who know this stuff better than I do figure that the thing goes maybe 10-20% too fast, or at least has 10-20% too much energy going on.

Now, I figured that drag modelling is the suspect here. After all, we get neither G-restriction nor a "believable" (whatever that means) restriction on speed when loaded up.

Now I am sure the RAF would love to have a jet with this much kick. But I think it has a bit too much kick.

Not saying that this is not incredibly useful when buggering off at highspeed away from some angry annoyed tanks, but...the jet seems overpowered.

As for the speed breaks, if your zipping along at Mach 1.4 and apply it, your speed drops pretty quickly. (not as quickly as in SEF2k)

But with a lower speed...say around the 500knts mark...the thing bleeds off speed less quickly, where I would have thought you'd see a more noticeable effect. (I am probably talking out my ass here) Hence having to barell roll and do lots of speed bleeding moves to slow ya down!

Gavin

#561717 - 07/23/01 07:23 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 7
Badboy Offline
Junior Member
Badboy  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 7
UK
Hi Gavin,

Quote:
Originally posted by Gavin Bennett:
Part of the reasons of my constant harping on about this, is that a couple of people who know this stuff better than I do figure that the thing goes maybe 10-20% too fast, or at least has 10-20% too much energy going on.


The Typhoon as simulated has a top speed of Mach 1.83, I really dont think anyone could reasonably claim that is excessive. Ive seen published data for the Typhoon that ranges between Mach 1.8 and Mach 2. So the current model is if anything conservative, and certainly a good deal slower than the Mach 2.5 available in previous versions of EF2000.

Quote:
Now, I figured that drag modelling is the suspect here. After all, we get neither G-restriction nor a "believable" (whatever that means) restriction on speed when loaded up.


Those comments relate to structural and placard limits and its hard to see how that would make you suspicious of the drag model. For example, in Falcon4 those restrictions do exist, but they are only applied in accordance with the stores load category, and have nothing to do with Falcon4s drag model at all.

Quote:
As for the speed breaks, if your zipping along at Mach 1.4 and apply it, your speed drops pretty quickly. (not as quickly as in SEF2k) But with a lower speed...say around the 500knts mark...the thing bleeds off speed less quickly, where I would have thought you'd see a more noticeable effect. (I am probably talking out my ass here) Hence having to barell roll and do lots of speed bleeding moves to slow ya down!


The airbrake will indeed be much more noticeable at higher speeds, and less and less effective as the speed drops, so what you are seeing is correct. That is because the drag is proportional to the square of the airspeed so that if you double your speed, the drag is four times greater. Similarly, when you are making a landing approach half your speed results in only one quarter of the drag. There is a trap here though, because thats only true to a certain point, if you get onto the backside of the power curve the drag will begin to increase rapidly but you will probably only notice that in Typhoon if you are already way too slow. If you are having a problem slowing down to land the answer in a civilian sim would probably be a longer slower approach, but my advice would be to get inside your base defences quickly and then do lazy circuits until you get your airspeed low enough to follow the glide path in without too much stress

Hope thats helpful!

Badboy

#561718 - 07/23/01 08:01 PM Re: I just don't understand it!.....  
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,900
valleyboy Offline
Member
valleyboy  Offline
Member

Joined: May 2001
Posts: 1,900
Aberdare, Wales, UK
By 2015 the EJ230 will be in the Typhoons, this will give the damn thing 120KN of thrust per engine! It will feel like a Maclaren F1 engine in your go-kart!
It may feel over powered to you, but that is why it has a lot of power to spare.........have you ever seen a real Typhoon fly? When you have you will know all about its thrust, s this thing gets off the runway pretty damn quick, in under 1/3 the space an F-16 needs....and yet it can go vertical straight off the runway and accelerate...and this is just with the EJ200, let alone the extra power that the EJ230 will give

------------------
If it aint bust, you haven't played with it enough!


"The engines are overheating, and so am I!!, we either make a move, or blow up!, So which is it to be?!"
----------------------------------
"It is better to keep one's mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
Pride Of Jenni race win
by NoFlyBoy. 04/15/24 12:22 AM
It's Friday: grown up humor for the weekend.
by NoFlyBoy. 04/12/24 01:41 PM
OJ Simpson Dead at 76
by bones. 04/11/24 03:02 PM
They wokefied tomb raider !!
by Blade_RJ. 04/10/24 03:09 PM
Good F-35 Podcast
by RossUK. 04/08/24 09:02 AM
Gleda Estes
by Tarnsman. 04/06/24 06:22 PM
Food Safety and Bad Roommates
by KRT_Bong. 04/04/24 02:16 AM
Incredible historical ironies
by PanzerMeyer. 04/03/24 01:56 PM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0