To: hitech-sim (Hitech Simulation Mailing list) Reply-To: hitech-sim (Hitech Simulation Mailing list) Errors-To: postmaster@onion.rain.com Precedence: bulk Bcc: hitech-sim-out Subject: Hitech Simulation Digest V1 : I31 Hitech Simulation Digest Volume 1 : Issue 31 Wed Aug 18 06:13:15 PDT 1993 Compilation copyright (C) 1993 Jeff Beadles Send submissions to "hitech-sim@onion.rain.com" Send add/drop requests to "majordomo@onion.rain.com" Archives are available via ftp from onion.rain.com [147.28.0.161] Today's Topics: AW Questions - Episode 12 Mark Kuebeler Subject: AW Questions - Episode 12 > 1. True or false - realism options have no effect on network play, the >options are preselected by the host? This would mean that everything is >'off' in page 870(no spins, blackouts, etc), and 'on' in the realism >arenas. The host can force realism options ON, but it will not force options OFF. In other words, if the host is set up for blackouts and spins, you can't turn them off, but you can enable any realism features (except realtime and lethality) in non-realism arenas. Naturally, this would tend to put you at a severe disadvantage! > > 2. How do ammo loads REALLY work? Either my math is deficient or the >book has conflicting info: the graph on p.34 says that the FW190 caries >1340 gun shells and 390 cannon shells. Then on p.32 it says that it >carried '950 rounds for its two machine guns, 500 for two of its 4 20mm >cannon, and 280 for the remaining two'. The numbers don't add up >correctly to me. OK, what's the real dope? How can I tell when my cannon >shells are out? Do the guns fire 1-1 (one cannon shell for every bullet)? > It would not surprise me that the SVGA manual contains errors! Basically, all weapons fire at the same time. Although it was possible to set guns and cannons to fire separately, anecdotal evidence suggests few pilots ever did this. The reasoning was that shot opportunites were few enough that when they did fire they wanted do as much damage as possible. Lethality therefore drops every time a weapon runs out of ammo. The old AW manual had a nice graph showing the changes in lethality at certain ammo load percentages. I'm not sure if it's still valid, but it's copyrighted, so I can't reproduce it here. > 4. What the hell is a 'flat turn'? I've always understood a "flat turn" to be a turn done in the horizontal plane only, as opposed to an out-of-plane maneuver like a yoyo or a loop. In a flat turn you use up kinetic energy to change direction, but you don't gain potential energy in the process that you can convert back to kinetic E. Thus it is not considered a particularly wise opening move. > > 5. Where is the best place to get maps? > There are maps of the Europe and Pacific theaters in Windows BMP format in the MPGames library on GEnie. They are slightly more detailed than the in-flight maps. A poster sized map of the ETO can be ordered from GEnie for about $7. It's extremely well done and very accurate. > 7. Do you find it better to use the 'local hits' option? > When this feature first appeared it was not optional, and quite a few players demanded that it be made so. As Jeff pointed out, they wanted to know when the host acknowledged a hit, not when the front-end reported a hit to the host (which more often than not threw the hit out the window). I don't use it either, but as a training aid it might help you get a feel for how much lead you need to pull and how to judge where the tracer stream is landing when you fire. When you get comfortable with your gunnery, turn local hits off so you can see when the host says you're hitting. ------------------------------- From: Andrew.Stevens@prg.oxford.ac.uk Subject: Tornado Patches etc I recently (yesterday) spent an afternoon talking to the DI people for a GameBytes interview. The following is a summary of the currently planned patches to Tornado: *** IMPORTANT: The patches for the North American and European versions *** of the game will be DIFFERENT AND INCOMPATIBLE. This is because of *** the different protection schemes employed. Revision A: complete, now testing. Due for release in a day or two. This will fix the problem with SAMs *always* completely destroying your aircraft plus a bunch of minor bugs. SAMs will now completely kill around 1/4 of the time, but otherwise will do very heavy damage. Practice flying with bits missing... The explanation of the lethal SAMs was quite interesting: the beta testers and developers got so good at the game they hardly ever got hit and so didn't really notice intense lethality as a problem. I've been promised a floppy in the post - I'll upload to onion.rain.com just as soon as I get it. This will be the *European* version - the North America version is being prepared by Spectrum Holobyte. It may already be ready... Revision B: in preparation, due in a month. This is the major fix. Revisions should include: - a more sane/authentic handling of radar range switching and the like - a replacement of the Romb mobile SAM launcher with the Strela 13 which fires IR missiles as portrayed in the game (the Romb actually fires radar guided missiles - much blushing at DI for this oversight). - support for joystick calibration for all joystick types - Revisions / improvements in the mission planner to - Reworked Soundblaster code - A bunch of other bits and bobs I can't recall because I left my notes at home :-( A final note: also I managed to wangle a test-ride with a prototype Flightstick pro (the one with a coolie hat) that DI had been given to ensure it worked with Tornado. I found I much preferred it to the FCS - less stiff but a longer, smoother, action and a much more professional finish. A final final note: everything is bigger in the US. The US box must have twice the internal volume of the European one. In Texas the must presumably use a packing crate :-) Andrew ------------------------------- From: Andrew.Stevens@prg.oxford.ac.uk Subject: Re: Tornado campaigns jjsterre@acs.ucalgary.ca writes: >1) You wingies always hit their targets; they do not get blown away. This definately isn't true. Your wingies are pretty good, but they're definately not perfect. What happens is that the game only has a finite number of slots for simulating bombs, bullets, missiles etc. To ensure they aren't used up for you when things get hot (cf. bombs not coming off when you press in Falcon, say) the game doesn't actually model missiles etc fired at the wingies. However, this doesn't mean they aren't threatened. The system works out a likelihood of them being shot down from time to time based on the current threats etc. If this gets high or they get ``unlucky'' ... poof! >2) You do. 8) Can't disagree with this one. >3) Therefore, you can hit almost any target by sending the other Tornados >after really tough places - dense AAA/SAMs/fighters - and they will be > pounded - while you stay alive in some less lethal place. The only thing >the wingies don't seem to want to do is drop JP233 without you around, >but this may have been me screwing up with the waypoint commands too. Probably, I don't recall this being mentioned as a limitation. I think you have to be very sure the JP233 run lines up over the runway. >5) What you do doesseem to affect the campaign. I have concentrated on wiping >the enemy's logistical system from the face of the earth; the enemy is >listed by now as having 15% supply, and "none" supply at all airbases. I'll >report if I see any fighters - seems to me that w/o fuel there shouldn't be any >(and I've specially blown up all the hardened fuel dumps at all their airbases! Yes, the ground combat model is primarily based on supply/demand logistics equation. If strikes on transport choke points and airbases reduce supply and stocks combat efficiency starts to fall off sharpish. >8) If nothing else, despite not concentrating on their airbases per se, >the air superiority rating is increasingly in my favor. See above. >6) Campaigns are FUN! If you enjoy mission planning, you'll love them. I'll >second those who'd prefer a Falcon-style "camapign continues regardless if you live or die on the mission", but it's relatively minor. I think extra saving facilities will be available with the revision B patch. Andrew ------------------------------- From: Andrew.Stevens@prg.oxford.ac.uk Subject: Re: Tornado chaffs Juan A. Hermoso writes: >... book by RAF crew... >when approaching the target (and before any missile were fired at >them), they started pumping chaff to avoid being targeted by the SAMs >and AAAs. > >Well, I have tried this and I must admit that it does not help a bit. I get >exactly the same amount of missiles after my tail regardless of the amount of >chaff I throw, so I wonder if DI guys have taken into account the possibility >of fooling radars with chaff and not only with ECM (I mean ground radars, not >missile radars). I think I can answer this one fairly definitively. They definately *do* model chaff etc. However, bear the following in mind: 1. If you're heading towards the source of radar emmisions chaff will have little effect. It needs to be between you and the emitting site to matter much. 2. The SAM's modelled in Tornado are short-range *Infra-red guided* types - the radar is used only for initial tracking/ranging/launch. That's why they show red rather than orange on the threat warning display. To decoy these missiles you need to pop flares not chaff. Why infra-red SAMs? Because these are the types of missiles used to deal with low-level threats like the Tornado. The radar guided stuff is typically long/medium range medium/high altitude work. There was, however, an oversight: the launcher type that is drawn/documented launches radar guided missiles in the real world! This will be fixed in the ``revision B'' version of the game (see earlier posting). Andrew ------------------------------- From: COSULICH@area.trieste.it Subject: About AW Hi, I've read messages about AW. You must play it in Arena on Genie, because playing it stand alone isn't amusing. But I'm in Italy, so it's very difficult and expensive to connect with Genie: so, what could I do? Could I put the game on a network? Is it worth it? TIA [The newer versions of AW (SVGA AW) allow you to connect with another player and play head-to-head with them. --Jeff] Ciao Guido Cosulich@area.trieste.it ------------------------------- From: kongo@hip-hop.suvl.ca.us (Kris Ong) Subject: virtuality machine Just got back from the virtual reality exhibit in Boston. They had this "Virtuality" machine, that ran a WWI dogfight, two machines hooked together fighting in real time, complete with the VR helmet. Definitely worth the wait in line and the $3 spent on it. They also had a hang-glider running on the same machine. Any chance this will be showing up at home in the next few years. It was a definite experience. All you in the area go by the World Trade Center Bosten and take a ride. Made me feel that vacation trip to Boston wasn't a waste of time. Kris. krismon@quack.kfu.com ------------------------------- [[ End of digest Volume 1 : Issue 31 ]]