my profile | register | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
»  COMBATSIM.COM Forum Archive   » Game Discussions (Genre)   » Helos   » AH = LB2?

   
Author Topic: AH = LB2?
Dondo
Member
Member # 4176

posted 05-15-2000 12:29 PM     Profile for Dondo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Ok, I have been working with Apache Havoc in order to give it a second chance. The resolution thing anoyed me too much to keep playing, but on a bored Sat. afternoon, thought I would re-install and try it again. I have messed around a little and would just like some opinons between AH and LB2.Who likes which one more? Which one in your opinion is more realistic (avionics/flight model/weapons etc.) I like all the stuff going on around me, and the terrain is much better I think (more buildings, rivers etc.) Any comments?
Dondo

Posts: 165 | From: | Registered: Apr 2000  |  IP: Logged
Richard 'Flexman' Hawley
Member
Member # 55

posted 05-15-2000 02:10 PM     Profile for Richard 'Flexman' Hawley   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Goodie :-)

LB2 is a study sim and as such details the systems to a higher fidelity. For avionics and mission equipment package, LB2 has no equal by default of design. (I'm a systems guy really - comes with my background of software engineering).

The FM still stands up, although it doesn't have all the parameters as AH/CH it does let you do auto-rotations. Engine output is handled much better. CH's handling of forces around different parts of the rotor almost make up for this (that and other effects LB2 doesn't do).

Weather, wind in particualr is modeled fairly well too. Coming in gusts and is localised (different regions have different weather). LB2 just has a simple constant delta-v for wind. Apaches are not as sluggish as presented in LB2, but then the Jane's game doesn't have many cultural objects to avoid. Then again CH has FM issues too, the sidways flight speed and tail authority is underweight. (But potentially correctable).

EECH doesn't have anywhere near the avionic levels of the real choppers (but then LB2 is also a lightweight representation of the 64 delta). But it does a fairly good job of acknowledging the need for SEEING targets you've killed (they remain on your target list until LOS is re-established and swept by sensors to confirm their destruction and removal from said list). In LB2 you hid behind a hill, draw a PFZ around a rapier site, pop 5 missiles and bang-bang-bang all the targets die and vanish from your TSD. That wouldn't happen in CH, there's no way of knowing if you had destroyed the site without looking to confirm it. A small detail yes.

Weapons modelling, again it's a bit of a mixed bag for both sims. LB2 has the edge here I think because gravity plays a bigger role in their balistic path. Also the way EECH is programmed for networking means you can't arbitrarily shoot Kentucky windgage style.

But EECH does try to model armour effectivness to a small degree, it's not always one shot one kill. And proximity damage is modelled which neither are present in LB2.

As far as terrain goes, LB2 is quite dated now. I don't like like muddy textures in sims, I think they look awful; blury and unconvincing in what they are trying to do. Personal tastes aside, I know the actual terrain in Razorworks games comes from real places. Although looking "simmy", those rivers, powerlines, general features and elevations are accurate. LB2 is a height map from a larger region and repainted with the textured features painted on, it's made up (but higher mesh res). See my feature on Terrain In Simulation at SimHQ.

Both AH and LB2 were designed for 640x480. LB2 features a user friendly squashed everything in cockpit, AH is what they actually look like but difficult to use on a monitor.


So, they both do things the other doesn't, which leads into my parting shot on this topic.

It's a bit of mismatch to compare them, a study sim verses a mid-level sim, both of which had very different goals in the minds of the designers. Both of which are very good.

Ultimatley at the end of the day if you're having fun, you are the winner.

Nobody is making any money out of either sim today. Austin Skunkworks is no more, Razorworks was lucky to get CH out given the poor sales of AH and sims in general. Piracy does make a difference when figures are so marginal it seems.

My assertion is:
AH != LB2

Therefore:
LB2 != AH

But I'd also assert:
LB2 == AH == hours of enjoyment

I could go into more details, but that will have to wait.


Posts: 396 | From: West Yorkshire, United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Blaze
Member
Member # 198

posted 05-16-2000 03:11 AM     Profile for Blaze   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
So you didn't feel like writing a book about that other subject but here it came over you?
Posts: 1556 | From: | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Richard 'Flexman' Hawley
Member
Member # 55

posted 05-16-2000 03:53 AM     Profile for Richard 'Flexman' Hawley   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
You accusing me of inconsistency? "This assertion can not be proved"

But I digress, I'm already writing a lengthy comparative feature on all chopper sims and how they compare with some of the real systems, so it's sort of fresh in my head. Besides, at the time I wrote about the wingman stuff I was busy and not sat in the sun web browsing the afternoon away.


Posts: 396 | From: West Yorkshire, United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Madufo
unregistered

posted 05-16-2000 09:13 AM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Richard said:
"Then again CH has FM issues too, the sidways flight speed and tail authority is underweight. (But potentially correctable)."

I found the side slipping a tad difficult, ok I admit it, very fifficult At least compared to LB2. I wouldn't know if it supposed to be like that or a broken FM. A solution was hinted, any written material about it?


IP: Logged
Seawolf
Member
Member # 1787

posted 05-17-2000 01:33 PM     Profile for Seawolf   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I tried the demo last night and I have AH as well. I'm sorry but with all the settings to full and realistic it just doesn't feel like a helicopter to me. Feels like an arcade game. LB2 as old as it is still gives me a lot of immersion, not to mention the ability to fly different types of missions such as scout,insertion (blackhawk), as well as Attack.
One thing that really caught my attention with the flight model in CH was at full realism settings it was almost impossible to fly the comanche, when lifting off there was so my tourque I literally had to hold fullleft rudder to stabalize. I doubt very seriously a fly-by-wire system in the comanche is this difficult to fly.
Although this was just a demo I wasn't really overwhelmed with an urge to go get this game. Some of the graphics were ok, and I really liked the in cockpit visuals, but a lot of it just looked a little too cartoonish to me. Anyway, you asked for my opinion so there it is.

Posts: 1322 | From: Clearwater, Fl. USA | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
Dondo
Member
Member # 4176

posted 05-17-2000 01:42 PM     Profile for Dondo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
thanks for all the replys, I am still working on A/H, I have not given up on it yet. I have not touched LB2 in a while, but after I did, the terrain does look rather dated by todays standards. A/H terrain is better (cooler cities) but is still somewhat cartoonish.
Dondo

Posts: 165 | From: | Registered: Apr 2000  |  IP: Logged
Blaze
Member
Member # 198

posted 05-17-2000 01:43 PM     Profile for Blaze   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Seawolf,

If you have followed recent discussions, you could have noted that we all agree that right now it's appropriate to turn cross coupling ON for the Comanche, for the very reason of the FBW.
If you haven't followed, you know by now.


Blaze

Hmmm, 'Madufo', that rings a bell I think ...

[This message has been edited by Blaze (edited 05-17-2000).]


Posts: 1556 | From: | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Seawolf
Member
Member # 1787

posted 05-18-2000 07:01 AM     Profile for Seawolf   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Thanks, I haven't followed so far. too many other things at one time.
Posts: 1322 | From: Clearwater, Fl. USA | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged

All times are MST (US)  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | COMBATSIM.COM Home

COMBATSIM.COM, INC. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
Ultimate Bulletin Board 6.04b

Sponsor
2014 COMBATSIM.COM - All Rights Reserved