Anymore future patches in the works???

[mbatch729]

Originally posted by Arkady
.......
Sometimes I feel that game is only one-sided but this sides changes depending on abilities of my opponent , so I prefer no big changes in combat AI

I agree 110% w/you on this one. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[NAVMAN]

TheElf:My own experience in ACM is a few fam hops(rear seat),
while going thru Pensacola. My task was to keep a visual on the bad guy and keep the pilot informed as to relative position. In reality, my main job was not to get sick. As I recall, we mainly
fought in the vertical, using yo-yos. I do not recall much in the way of a rolling dog fight, but it's a long time ago. Seems we kept going up and down, with the Gs pushing my head into my lap. Unless someone wants to come up with,"UV-The Air War For The South Pacific", I think the best we can hope for is that the overall
results of air combat are within the realm of reason. To model
each aircraft for every component of its capabilities I think is beyond the scope of the game. A reasonable abstraction of these
components is ok with me, if the overall results mirror reality.

[Nasrullah]

The game designers (may God have mercy on them) built a lot
of parameters into the the aircraft vs. aircraft combat model. They then tweaked and tweaked, until they despaired of further progress. Certainly numbers can be tweaked some more, but never to everyone's (anyone's?) satisfaction. "Morale" and "experience" are just the final fudge factors. They have nothing to do with the psychological condition of the virtual pilots. It seems likely to me that raising the effectiveness of Zeros against B-17s (or whatever your peeve might be) had some other undesirable side effect. Since Matix is unwilling to give control over the parameters to the UV community we'll just
have to play the game as it is and gripe, as the hard-coded parameters of human nature compel us.