|
So in the video yall talked about how AC2 comes after this one in the offical timeline?! That's kinda crazy to think about since 5 goes on and on about a Belkan War that went on 10 or 15 years previous to it? So i had just assumed that a game with the subtitle "The Belkan War" would go into a bit what that was about. At least considering what is shown about Belka in 5 it really seems like they love them some wars 
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 13:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 05:23 |
|
|
Ace Combat 2 takes place in 1997 (the same year it was released, I believe), in a different part of Strangereal. The Belkan War they talk about in AC5 is the one we're currently fighting in during AC0, but honestly this game does very little to explicitly tie into 5 except for a couple major story events. That being said there's not no relation, but you have to pay attention to see it. It's an odd choice. As much as I love the later games I can't wait til we get to 2. It's going to be a trip for the people who only played the later games in the series 
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 15:52
|
|
|
VKing posted:I'd just like to Yeah. In a more recent example, the F-35 muddies this up somewhat with an A/B/C straight out of the gate (well, in theory) but that just means three variants and the naval one ended up as C, not that C = Carrier. The F-15C is not carrier capable, for example. also multi-role, not multi-roll remember: "DO A BARREL ROLL ...in your multi-role Arwing." As for the Hornet being a sort of sad also-ran in the AC plane selection, it's true, lots of planes have that unfortunate distinction. The Super Hornet (which is basically a new aircraft, do a side by side comparison and you'll see the Hornet and Super Hornet are really different for having the same basic shape) has a specific and quite useful role in AC6 and ACAH, at least, but otherwise you're not flying anything in the Hornet family unless you want to be. And at a certain level, it's fun to just fly what you want. AC as a series is pretty good about letting you do that and succeed. Take an A-10 into a strictly air to air mission and just bomb the enemy targets? Sure! e: by the way, excellent way to mute spoilers there, crow. Next time I suggest getting Lune to provide you with LOOOOOOOGANNNNNNNNN.mp3 though 
Psion fucked around with this message at 18:17 on Dec 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 17:52
|
|
that the C in F/A-18C is because it's the third major variant of the F-18 (following the A and B), not because it's carrier capable.
|
Psion posted:e: by the way, excellent way to mute spoilers there, crow. Next time I suggest getting Lune to provide you with LOOOOOOOGANNNNNNNNN.mp3 though Crow, I don’t know if you’ve already finished recording all the missions, or how the Ace Combat flight model handles energy conservation, but you might want to consider not turning in the same plane (geometrically, not aircraft) as your targets. Guys keep escaping from you because putting your flight path vector (this thing:  ) on the other plane results in closure, increasing aspect, and you getting spit out of the turn. Try a displacement roll, where you accept overshoot and while maneuvering out of their plane in order to let them get ahead of you without losing speed. The lock-on camera should make this easy.It looks sort of like this:  At 1, the attacker sees that he is going to overshoot the defender. Instead trying to turn in behind the defender, the attacker pulls up and rolls opposite the direction of the turn (step 2), allowing him to keep track of the defender. The attacker then manages roll rate and vertical displacement in order to finish back on the defender's tail. You can read more about managing angle and closure in Chapter 1 here. Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 19:00 on Dec 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
Cooked Auto posted:The F/A-18 Hornet does something similar in this case. The fun thing about that multirole capability was that it was mostly an accident. When they were first developing the Hornet out of the YF-17 Cobra there were supposed to be four variants: an F-18 fighter, an A-18 attacker, a TF-18 trainer and a non-carrier-based F-18L for export. Then improvements in avionics and multi-function displays happened, so the fighter and attacker versions got combined, and the F-18L never happened either because every foreign customer that chose the Hornet over the Fighting Falcon preferred the multi-role version.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Crow, I don’t know if you’ve already finished recording all the missions, or how the Ace Combat flight model handles energy conservation, but you might want to consider not turning in the same plane (geometrically, not aircraft) as your targets. Guys keep escaping from you because putting your crosshair on the other plane results in closure, increasing aspect, and you getting spit out of the turn. Try a displacement roll, where you accept overshoot and while maneuvering out of their plane in order to let them get ahead of you without losing speed. The lock-on camera should make this easy. This works well. But probably the most basic thing to do that works in any Ace Combat game is the arcadey equivalent of energy management: min/maxing your throttle inputs. What do I mean by this? I mean, rarely leave your throttle at "cruise" or neutral input. There's no fuel to think about and you're actually being timed so this is beneficial both for basic combat and S-ranking a mission. The planes in this game have a pretty simple flight model that looks like the graph below. Punch your afterburner any time you aren't maneuvering, so that you enter an engagement with maximum energy on your first pass. The AI in this game begins to position itself for a shot or go defensive once you enter a certain radius around it. Until then, they fly pretty slow and in straight lines or gentle banking turns. If your closing speed is extremely high, they have no time to react to a missile shot and you'll basically get a free kill. If you're good, you can line up a missile kill and a gun kill simultaneously on his wingman (1st person view highly recommended, 3rd person view is pretty but twitchy, and makes gun runs very difficult). For formations of 3 or more aircraft you can even shoot a brace of SP weapons as you close and bag a third or fourth kill for virtually no extra effort. Then, you have two options. If you have to turn towards the fight, jam your speed brakes. Your turn radius will tighten up quickly once you drop below your cruising airspeed, and allow you to get back inside for another pass. Pay attention to your speed and attitude, do not stall out! It's easy to sense an oncoming stall through the force feedback in your controller, assuming you have that feature. Otherwise, you can "boom and zoom" and use your huge energy advantage to leave that engagement bubble again. The AI won't follow you if you gain enough distance and they won't follow you at an aircraft's full speed, but they will continue on the same heading that they "forgot" you at for some time. You can cheese the enemy by looping back and hitting them at full speed in a head-on pass. They will virtually never have time to lock on and your missiles will almost always hit, especially SP Weapons like SAAM or XMAA. Unless you're flying late-game aircraft that turn on a dime, it's much more efficient to "read the tide of battle  " and take out each enemy formation using a mixture of high speed passes and airbrake turns.In AC6, they added the gameplay element of the "high-g turn" which basically gives you a spurt of your maximum maneuverability if you mash airbrake and throttle together, at the expense of almost all your forward momentum. Really great for this tactic because the further you were from stall speed, the longer you could hold that turn. But in previous games in the series, it required a more nuanced use of throttle.  edit: Refined my explanation a bit and added a visual aid. The Casualty fucked around with this message at 19:52 on Dec 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
The Casualty posted:Then, you have two options. If you have to turn towards the fight, jam your speed brakes. Your turn radius will tighten up quickly once you drop below your cruising airspeed, and allow you to get back inside for another pass. Pay attention to your speed and attitude, do not stall out! It's easy to sense an oncoming stall through the force feedback in your controller, assuming you have that feature. Otherwise, you can "boom and zoom" and use your huge energy advantage to leave that engagement bubble again... Unless you're flying late-game aircraft that turn on a dime, it's much more efficient to "read the tide of battle  Well, that certainly is different. IRL, turn radius is often secondary to turn rate. Also, I guess the Ace Combat flight model doesn't really do potential energy?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:
Like I said, it's pretty arcadey. The basic thing to remember is that there's a sweet spot where you turn in a tighter circle than you otherwise would. Other than that, you have a maximum speed, a stall speed, and somewhere in the middle, a cruising speed, and this is all arbitrarily dependent on which aircraft you're flying much more so than other traditional factors like drag coefficient, attitude and altitude. Your plane will deploy air brakes, flaps, spoilers, etc. in a realistic looking manner but it's just a visually appealing way of indicating "I AM DECELERATING." Ascending and descending have a barely noticeable effect on your ability to accelerate and decelerate; the throttle position is the primary factor. The only atmospheric affect you'll ever encounter that isn't cosmetic is hitting your operational ceiling, which just causes your aircraft to stall. So overall, the FM about as arcade as it gets without being a rail shooter. But that's not to say it isn't fun, because once you get good you can pull off some insane, cool looking poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
Neat. Well, basic lead-lag maneuvers should still work. I remember playing one of the really early Playstation Ace Combat games, but I had no idea what I was doing back then. Do all the aircraft roll and turn at the same, but with different radii?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
nine-gear crow posted:Indeed, it does: Other codewords you'll hear during this game, in no particular order: Pickle: Indicates the launch of an unguided bomb Magnum: Indicates the launch of an Winchester: out of ammo Bogey: unknown aircraft Bandit: hostile aircraft Vector, followed by a number between 0 and 359- indicates heading, with 0 being north, 090 east, 180 south, 270 west. For example, if the AWACS says "bandits at vector zero-four-five", that means you've got incoming enemy planes from the northeast*. This is different from the clock system, as in "bandits at 3 o'clock" which refers to your individual left/right, not cardinal directions. 12 o'clock is dead ahead, 6 o'clock is behind you. Angels: indicates altitude in units of 1000 feet above sea level. "Bandits at angels 10" means that there are enemy aircraft at 10,000 feet. *That said, I think Eagle Eye only specifies heading rounded to the nearest 10. SkyEye in 04 did, anyway. EDIT: AC6 introduces the fictional DRIVE and SLASH, but we'll get there eventually. EDIT 2: AH, gently caress it, here's a big-rear end list of them. ninjahedgehog fucked around with this message at 22:45 on Dec 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
Kadorhal posted:The fun thing about that multirole capability was that it was mostly an accident. When they were first developing the Hornet out of the YF-17 Cobra there were supposed to be four variants: an F-18 fighter, an A-18 attacker, a TF-18 trainer and a non-carrier-based F-18L for export. This is also the crux of the F/A-18's silly designation. Unlike every other multirole plane, the navy settled on F/A instead of something that was actually allowed by the 1962 Tri-Service aircraft designation system. The only reason I've heard for this was that when they tried calling it the AF-18 all the A-6 and A-7 pilots who would be switching to it made a stink because they didn't want to fly no stinkin' fighter. While an FA-18 would raise the same from the F-14 drivers. Although the reality probably has less to do with the pilots themselves and more to do with commodores and admirals representing the "attack" or "fighter" lobbies. Note that I have no idea if this anecdote is true, but it certainly sounds plausible. In any case I personally write F-18 unless I need to be really specific.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Neat. Well, basic lead-lag maneuvers should still work. No, there's statistical values that determine how "maneuverable" an aircraft is. The exact values are buried, but abstractly represented on the aircraft select screen in the pentagon chart; the attributes they describe are rather vague. In this case, we want to look at "Mobility," "Speed," "Stability." Mobility is basically how tightly an aircraft can pitch, the roll rate, and how aggressively it can yaw (yes, you can yaw in this game, but other than crabbing your gunfire into stuff it's not as useful as on a real aircraft). Speed is indicative of both maximum speed AND acceleration. Aircraft with high speed and low mobility generally handle like loving bricks, while aircraft with high scores in both can usually break the game wide open since only the cheating Ace AI can fully utilize such agility and then some. Stability is how "floaty" the aircraft feels while maneuvering. Unstable aircraft respond to inputs slower and therefore aren't as good for gunnery or evading surprise attacks by terra firma I'm pretty sure stability also influences stall speed. Generally, these scores are rather vague and you're best off just flying whatever you like the feel of. For instance, I like the challenge of a suboptimal airframe, so I'll often pick the worst aircraft that has the SP Weapon I want. In AC Zero a lot of times I'll just do an F-15 run because the Eagle is just really fun to fly and has everything you need to beat any mission in the game. But sometimes I like to fly the really broken planes and speedrun a mission, it depends much more on my mood than "can plane X out-turn plane Y?"On the subject of air combat maneuvers, there are effective dogfighting tactics, but they're limited in complexity and usefulness since energy as a physical concept in these games is incredibly basic and you end up not needing to think ahead as much. There's no such thing as bleeding energy from the defender, you can't do a Thatch Weave with Pixy. Ace AI will present a challenge because they have extra maneuvers in their repertoire. They can scissor with you, they can jink and snap roll to spoil your missiles, and some can Cobra to get behind you (Yellow 13 and his wingmen in AC04 abuse the hell out of this). But at the end of the day, the basic game plan on offense is modulate throttle to turn inside the enemy (Yo-Yo's do help a lot though, changing the angle is the best way to end stalemates or driving a sled because the AI will often break off and give up his tail) or use raw speed to ambush and escape. And, all you need to do on defense is maintain enough energy to make hard turns. Every enemy A2A missile can maneuver through only 45 degrees before it loses lock. You can break 95% of missile locks just by turning hard and making it chase you. This works whether the shot is from far away or right on your rear end. In fact, the most dangerous missiles are from head-on, which is why you don't engage head-on unless you are really truckin', so they have no time to lock you. You can make the game as challenging or as easy as you want by how strictly you adhere to these principles, since the AI has very little defense against any of that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 01:18
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I remember playing one of the really early Playstation Ace Combat games, but I had no idea what I was doing back then. Do all the aircraft roll and turn at the same, but with different radii? Honestly, I might be remembering wrong but I'm pretty sure that's how it works in AC04 for some reason. I know for a fact late-game planes could barrel roll like a boss (Su-37 actually did so too fast for me to handle, ever since then I've mostly preferred the Su-35 if a game includes it over the -37) but they didn't seem to actually change pitch any better than the early-game stuff I had; the only one that had noticeable difference on that front was the F-14 turning so very, very slowly when I took it out for Comona.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 03:42
|
|
|
Fun fact, the T-38 trainer (which the F-5 is based on) has an instantaneous roll rate in the neighborhood of 720 degrees per second. As a result, continuous aileron rolls at full deflection are a prohibited maneuver.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 08:53
|
|
|
Hey, airplane tactics and stuff! Granted, it doesn't all apply to jets, but its still handy to know. I think you need archives to view it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 09:52
|
|
|
One other thing I noticed during the Indigo* fight, Crow, is that you seem to fall prey to target-fixation quite a bit - concentrating on one target who's got you spinning around in circles while all his buddies start lining up shots on you. It may be worthwhile, when you're finding yourself outmaneuvered by a baddie, to see if you have a better, more reliable shot at his wingman instead of trying to chase him down. * Indigo is considered a color, rather than simply a shade of blue or purple, largely because Isaac Newton was kinda odd. He wanted there to be seven colors so that they would match to the seven notes of a musical major scale. Interestingly, though, what he called 'indigo' is what we today would call 'dark blue;' what he called 'blue' is really closer to what we'd've called 'cyan.'
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 12:26
|
|
|
DivineCoffeeBinge posted:One other thing I noticed during the Indigo* fight, Crow, is that you seem to fall prey to target-fixation quite a bit - concentrating on one target who's got you spinning around in circles while all his buddies start lining up shots on you. It may be worthwhile, when you're finding yourself outmaneuvered by a baddie, to see if you have a better, more reliable shot at his wingman instead of trying to chase him down. Yeah, in Zero I felt like I was getting set up more often than I would in other games. This one really made me change the way I approached dogfighting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 12:39
|
|
|
DivineCoffeeBinge posted:One other thing I noticed during the Indigo* fight, Crow, is that you seem to fall prey to target-fixation quite a bit - concentrating on one target who's got you spinning around in circles while all his buddies start lining up shots on you. It may be worthwhile, when you're finding yourself outmaneuvered by a baddie, to see if you have a better, more reliable shot at his wingman instead of trying to chase him down. This is very good advice. The enemy Ace pilots do try to swarm you, but this is exploitable if you do exactly that. While you're being chased by a couple of enemies, there's almost always one who is breaking off their attack or extending for a better angle. You can usually break off on one of these guys and get a missile lock before anyone else shoots you. This is an essential tactic on Ace mode because virtually everything that hits you will kill you, but it's also good for ending fights sooner on any difficulty, especially if you cannot outrun or out-turn the enemy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 15:25
|
|
|
I love that a lot of the Belkan names are just jumbling around the first and last names of famous soccer players with a couple of other sources mixed in.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 01:36
|
|
|
frankenfreak posted:I love that a lot of the Belkan names are just jumbling around the first and last names of famous soccer players with a couple of other sources mixed in. well this solves my different nationality random name generator problem
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
Well to be fair, when has there ever been a group of famous or infamous german names they could use otherwise?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 01:17
|
|
|
If anyone's interested in the Draken to a degree that might be considered unhealthy, The Fluff just posted its entire flight manual. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3373768&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=654#post453457673 Also, see if this reminds you of the MiG-21: TheFluff posted:According to the performance graphs, climbing to 11000 meters with full afterburner eats about 30% of the internal fuel. Full dry thrust "only" eats about 22%. It's a very intercepty interceptor. I also need to write some words about datalinks. Or maybe I should finish that series of posts about the Viggen's computer systems... When a plane is designed to take off, shoot at enemy airplanes, and then land on a road because all the airfields are probably craters (optional: glowing) well, do you really need more?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
I was debating earlier if I was going to write something about Swedish aircraft and such or just quote what Fluff has posted in the Cold War thread on TFR to save me the hassle.  Fun fact I forgot to mention in full way earlier, both HAWX games are no longer available anywhere digitally. Even from Uplay/Ubisoft. Clearly they wanted to wash away the shame of it. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
Cooked Auto posted:I was debating earlier if I was going to write something about Swedish aircraft and such or just quote what Fluff has posted in the Cold War thread on TFR to save me the hassle. At the very least we should mention the amazing gripen commercial in this thread.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
Crigit posted:At the very least we should mention the amazing gripen commercial in this thread. If they ever make an Ace Combat movie, I'd want these guys to make it. With a higher-than TV budget,of course.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 21:41
|
|
|
VolticSurge posted:If they ever make an Ace Combat movie, I'd want these guys to make it. With a higher-than TV budget,of course. I remember that ad. Even at the time we were calling it Ace Combat: Gripen in the AI/Cold War threads. Psion fucked around with this message at 23:14 on Dec 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 23:07
|
|
|
you say saab I think https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PM3woO0AbCw
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 03:01
|
|
|
Ace Combat 7 announced for PS4. There's a video but it was taken down. Features "VR Support" too, apparently. I haven't turned my PS4 on in like 8 months but if it's in Strangereal I might have a reason.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
Lunethex posted:Ace Combat 7 announced for PS4. There's a video but it was taken down. https://twitter.com/PROJECT_ACES/status/673227200288579584 Does seem like it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 20:48
|
|
|
Trailer's back.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
Lunethex posted:Ace Combat 7 announced for PS4. There's a video but it was taken down. Pause it at 00:43, that Raptor definitely has the Osean roundel on its wing. EDIT: Hot drat, and according to r/acecombat the Flanker is Erusean. Welp, guess I'm buying a PS4 then.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:16
|
|
|
Please be good, please be good, please be good...
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
ninjahedgehog posted:Pause it at 00:43, that Raptor definitely has the Osean roundel on its wing. I hope the protagonist nation isn't Osea again... Or Osea-lite like Emmeria or the like. That said, welcome back Ace Combat! Now please, Project Aces, don't gently caress it all up by making it exclusive to the PSVR. Because you just know someone at the end of PA's boardroom table going "we must ruin this somehow. We have to!"
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
That used to be the line of thought but this is certainly exciting! Hopefully it's longer than AC6 was. Can't wait for more details.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
Kind of looks like a space elevator with how tall that tower is. Possibly closing up on Electrosphere's era?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 22:30
|
|
|
InfinityComplex posted:Kind of looks like a space elevator with how tall that tower is. It looked like a combination of the X-Seed 4000 and a space elevator with a splash of Dubai thrown in the too. So maybe...
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
Contrary to what got reported earlier, it's not VR exclusive. It just has the option to let you use VR. https://twitter.com/kazutoki/status/673243483772096512 Google Translate mangles it but still gives you the gist.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 23:08
|
|
|
I am very pleased about ac7 so far and we know basically nothing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Man do Japanese love waxing about war and humanity and stuff in video games. luckily, none of that survived to Assault Horizon, the only one I played... However, that got replaced with helicopters and super computer ace flying fun duels, so I don't know if I came ahead. Then again, HAWX had its own version of crazy, with mercenaries taking on the US because Tom Clancy. One day, they'll make an arcade plane sim where Mig-21bis WILL be the answer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 23:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 05:23 |
|
|
If you don't like the dumb, earnest waxing about war and humanity Ace Combat is going to be a bad time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 23:46
|
|
