| Quest for the Grail by Dan "Crash" Crenshaw |
||||
|
This article was originally posted over a year ago. Since then, there has been an incredible amount of progress in the Air Combat Simulation arena. Based on this new data, I have updated some of the information about what is going on, what has become standard, and what we can expect. Any new comments will be ITALICIZED.
Every discipline has it’s own form of the Holy Grail. Be it business, sports, hobbies whatever: every serious pursuit has an ultimate ideal. The Air Combat flight simulation genre is no different. Right now we are in a period of great creativity in the ACFS arena. Within the next 6 months or so, we will see an influx of some of the most incredible and all encompassing simulations ever dreamt of. The increased and ever increasing power of the PC and its’ peripherals has allowed the programmers to do today what they have been aspiring to for years.
I have questioned some truly HARD-CORE flight simulation fanatics. Many of their names and call signs would be familiar to you. I posed the question, "What would make the 'PERFECT' flight sim?" I asked for the top 10 "must have" features in a flight sim. They were ranked from the most important on down. Understand, ALL of the items listed are extremely important to fulfill the quest, so ranking them was very difficult. Really, there are no least important features. But in view of needed compromise due to programming limitations, the higher items on the list take precedence. I have compiled everyone’s ratings and listed them below. In the end the list exceeded 10 total items, so later in the article I post the entire list. Please realize that this list is by no means exhaustive. I do need to point out that there is a slight bias in the list, since most of the pilots’ I polled LAN network. As a result these pilots are adamant that LAN NETWORK support is indispensable!
The Top Ten
So what exactly do these categories mean? I will give explanations and comments from the poll. I will also list the sim, past or present, which in the opinion of those polled comes closest to fulfilling this category. You will notice that 2 sims take all of the honors here … save 1.
REALISTIC FLIGHT MODEL:
Pretty self-explanatory. The modeled aircraft must perform like the real thing. It must give you the "feel" of actually flying. "FEEL" was stated over and over again. It must have roll rates that are dynamic and change with altitude and air speed. It must bleed speed in a turn. It must perform differently at various altitudes in a fashion that conforms to the real characteristics of the aircraft. In short, the flight model must accurately depict all of the actual flight characteristics of the modeled aircraft.
JANES F-15 was released with a flight model that was very good, but still lacked. A subsequent patch moved F-15 into the "Best of" class with SU-27. Many still feel SU-27 is still the king here. We have FALCON 4 and SU-27 2.0 on the horizon, both expected to top all previous sims to date. We can expect SU-27 2.0 to be as good or better based on it's heritage, and the latest BETA builds of FALCON 4 prove that it will be tough to top as well. This area has only progressed over the past year.
DYNAMIC CAMPAIGN:First of all, a campaign MUST be included in any sim. There must be a method of providing accomplishment and a feeling of "I WON". Even if a Dynamic Campaign is not included, a "CANNED" campaign must be there. But the elusive Dynamic Campaign is what makes a sim playable for years to come. In the truly dynamic system, no war will ever be the same. This means that different strategies will be needed. Moreover, the effect of your mission loss or failure must play a roll. If you miss the target, the enemy will move into the next sector and you lose an airfield. Ideally, this includes supply line logistics. If you are tasked to destroy a supply convoy and fail to do so, then your enemy may continue to use high grade smart weapons against you. On the other hand, if you succeed but fail to protect your own supply lines, you may find yourself using dumb bombs instead of laser guided weapons. In the dynamic or semi-dynamic system, fighters SCRAMBLE from air bases you are approaching. If the system is comprehensive, including integration of a ground war, you may happen across targets of opportunity, such as a column of tanks advancing through a canyon. If you are on a mission for another target you have to make a strategic decision. This kind of LIVING world is what we need. Many sims have taken shots at various portions of a dynamic campaign, but none have incorporated them all. HIND had enemy foot soldiers scatter when you made a strafing run, EF2000 has the enemy move forward or back depending on the outcome of your mission, but lacked the ground war integration. Many have tried, but none have gone the distance. |
A concept that has been bouncing around for years is the "Virtual Battlefield". What better way to run a war than to have a Flight Sim coupled with a Tank sim, which is supporting a "DOOM STYLE" foot soldier game that depicts a MARINE landing from ships run from a Naval sim. The MARINE squad calls for an airstrike and you come in with your F-16 wing to support the Longbow squadron that is laying waste to the bad guys. Especially as the Internet comes of age and Bandwidth increases, think of the massive battles with scores of players that could be possible.
It is a well know fact this is one of my pet loves. A truly Dynamic Campaign is critical to long game play. EF2000 still retains this title, although TAW, just released, will be a formidable adversary in this area. SU-27 2.0 and FALCON 4 both claim to have Dynamic Campaigns in their up-coming releases. I have seen the world of FALCON 4, and nothing has ever come close .. anywhere near, what they are doing. I confess, however, that I have not seen Flanker 2.0's Dynamic Campaign, but based on the reputation of the developers and of the persistence known to exist on the BETA team, I expect this to be great as well. I believe we will see two very impressive Dynamic Campaigns released. Later we will talk about how this interfaces with my other fanaticizm - CO-OPERATIVE MULTIPLAYER ability.
EFFECTIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE:This encompasses a variety of aspects, but some of the key points follow. Wingmen that actually do as they are told, don’t fly into the ground, hit their targets at least once in a while, will break to avoid being killed … you get the picture. We need Wingmen that fly like LAN wingmen do, like real humans. Effective AI also means that the enemy doesn’t make head-ons at every merge, and maybe they bracket you once in a while (I will never forget when I got bracketed for the first time during the SU-27 1.5 beta sessions, I was never so elated at being shot down).
Effective AI also means that ground forces aren’t laid out in neat little rows or squares, and AI aircraft don’t wait until you drop a bomb on the runway to come after you. ESCORTS should not only stay with you (the flight they are SUPPOSED to protect), but actually protect that same flight. Enemy bandits should not follow you over your SAM emplacements (and SAM emplacements that will shoot at them if they do). I could easily go on for days here, but I think you see what we mean. We want AI that thinks like a human that wants to stay alive and win a war. AI only gets better with each passing release. DiD's F-22 ADF, JANES F-15, DiD's F-22 TAW, soon to be released FALCON 4 and SU-27 2.0 ... all have improved upon what has gone before.
NETWORK PLAY:This was primarily LAN based in the comments. But there is also the obvious need for Internet play. The sim should have Internet support built in, be tested and ready to go. Once LAN support is built in, Internet support follows nicely. They go hand in hand. As I mentioned earlier, most of the pilots’ poled are LAN fanatics (and unless you have flown in a LAN group, especially with RADIO COMMS, you just can’t understand), so LAN play showed up pretty high.
But as was pointed out by many of the guys, Internet support is a force that must be reckoned with. For the sim that comes closest to the mark, none do a good Internet setup yet, so the winner here is based upon the rock solid stability of it’s LAN capabilities. The runner up here, SU-27 Version 1.5, has the impressive feature of being able to enter or re-enter at will, but lacked the stability of EF. If we can get both of these in one sim … As I mentioned before, my other love. Not only is Network/Internet play a must these days, Co-operative play is required as well. JANES F-15 is an extraordinary game in so many ways, but fell miserably short when all it offered in the multi-play arena was H2H. This whole idea must have been an after thought, H2H only in a aircraft who's primary missions are STRIKE. Had co-operative play and even better, 2 man ships, been included ... the lack of a dynamic campaign could have easily been overlooked, especially with the very nice Mission Builder included. F-22 TAW has released with multi-play that includes H2H and co-operative missions, but not in a campaign. However, there is the ability to do both. The highly anticipated FALCON 4 and SU-27 2.0 are both planned to include multi-player, H2H and Co-operative missions both in campaign and Mission Building modules. This is an area I expect to progress even further with the advent of areas like NOVAWORLD where players can log on and fight together or against each other, singly or as teams in a campaign environment. The Electronic Battlefield is approaching faster and faster.
REALISTIC AVIONICS:This category had an amazing following for one sim. All save the lone Back to Bagdad vote went to SU-27. Not only should the avionics function as the real thing, they must also perform like the real thing. Different modes, range adjustment flexibility, detection cone functionality (a feature the winner here lacks).
Something that was mentioned by several was RADAR that locks you up while behind a hill -- has got to go! Radar Lock breaks must be modeled (as with the beaming in SU-27). Another feature anomaly that was given the "thumbs down" was the lack of Gyroscopic Effect on RADAR when rolling the aircraft ala. EF2000/TACTCOM. I think there can be no denying, JANES F-15 took this to a new level. SU-27 2.0 and FALCON 4 both will continue this trend.
REALISTIC WEAPONS PERFORMANCE AND DELIVERY:This was a point of some contention. My general feeling seems to be encompassed by the "sitting on the fencers" as well as the either/or crowd. Right now there are 2 sims that stood out above the rest in this category, but both had some pretty glaring issues to contend with. The weapons must be modeled accurately … not to what the manufacturers of these weapons publish. Thus the major flaw with SU-27. While the parameters of the weapons, and locking ability and the launching sequences seem very well done, the accuracy is ludicrous. SHILKES are no where near as deadly as they are in SU-27, SAMS are some of the toughest to spoof and the friendly weapons seem to be lemons. While an enemy R73 hits with almost deadly accuracy with a one hit kill (or may as well be dead hit) a commonality, your R73 may never even get close and when it does, a one hit kill is almost unheard of. And while it should really fall under the flight model category, if you are hit, your aircraft should have handling and systems difficulties. I rarely see an enemy aircraft in any sim suffer problems after a hit. They still manage to pull those high G full burner turns like before.
Of course, in SU-27 we don’t have the "KLINGON" infrared missiles as in EF2000/TACTCOM. However in EF2, the accuracy ratio seems a bit more realistic. Both of these sims are close, but still have far to go. Accurate flight modeling hit ratios, kill bubbles, and realistic "spoofability" are some of the items that are considered here. The current trend is to get closer to a more realistic environment. The power of the new processors is allowing more and more data to be assimilated. Expect SU-27 2.0 and FALCON 4 to excel in these areas. Go to Part II
|
|||
|
© 1997 - 2000 COMBATSIM.COM, Inc. All Rights Reserved. . Last Updated October 14th, 1998 |
||||
he Quest for the Holy Grail. The Knights of the Round Table aspired to find the Holy Grail because its attainment would prove their purity, piety and faith. It was unattainable to all save for one knight, Sir Galahad.
