I'm partial to military technology, and the AH-64 Apache/Mi-28 Havoc
combination represents the best of the operational helicopter
technologies that the American and former Soviet-bloc countries have to
offer. In this single package Empire and Razorworks have fielded a
simulation that offers action in both the Apache and the Havoc. Let's
take a look at their US release (1.1c) of Apache Havoc.
The Product and the Rating
It's in my nature to take note of the way a company "presents" its
products. The product, press release and the product package are in my
view a good way of setting the expectations of the buyer. I'd prefer to
not go off half-cocked and assume that a product was meant for me and
my particular playing style, so I expect the information presented to
help me make a reasonable decision.
It would be unfair to rate a product in certain categories if
the designers never intended for their product to compete in that area.
Comparing Novalogic's F16 and Microprose' Falcon 4, for example, really
is comparing apples and oranges. To be fair to the developer and
publisher, we have to better understand the "target audience" of the
simulation.
So who is the target audience for Apache Havoc? Well, I've attached the press release for the product HERE. Additionally, the box contains a fair amount of information about the sim.
Interpreting this information, I would offer that the designers of Apache Havoc were going after the middle ground between a study sim such as Jane's Longbow 2 and a less studied sim such as Mindscape's Team Apache. It is this light that I will review Apache Havoc.
The Manual and Training
Apache Havoc includes a single glue-bound manual as its key
information and training device. The manual is approximately 140 pages
and includes sections on game introduction, ground school, a discussion
of the Apache vs. Havoc, a campaign overview, cockpit overviews, and a
recognition guide. The manual was well written generally, but lacked an
index, making it difficult to locate particular information.
Furthermore, the manual screams for a Tips and Tactics guide.
Unfortunately Apache-Havoc contains no training
missions to hone your abilities. I was a bit disappointed in not being
able to learn about the different aircraft, particularly the Havoc.
Hundreds of hours of flight time in the Jane's Longbow series
have given me a wealth of information on the systems of the AH-64, but
since each sim incorporates the systems differently the virtual pilot
needs the opportunity to learn how the sim handles these systems.
In lieu of training missions there is the ability to run what
is called FREE FLIGHT from the main menu. Free Flight consists of a set
of three missions (one from each campaign area - Cuba, Golden Triangle,
and the Caspian Sea) where you can fly around and familiarize yourself
with the systems, flight model, and weapons. Since there is no
instructor pilot narrating these missions you are pretty much on your
own to figure things out.
You can modify the weapons and waypoints of these missions, and there
are enemy units included, but they are not part of the default waypoint
setup. You will have to modify the waypoints manually if you wish to
engage the enemy. You do not receive any debriefing for the free flight
missions.
Single Missions
Known as DYNAMIC MISSIONS, these individual missions are sort of a
mini-campaign through one of the three campaign theatres. Upon entering
the missions you are presented with several mission types to select
from: Deep Strike, Intercept, Recon, Scout, SEAD, and Tank Busting.
Some missions show the status of "in progress" denoting that the
mission has already started and the helo has taken off.
Before selecting one of the missions you have the option of checking
out the lay of the land through a very nice map interface. The icons on
the map represent known objects on the battlefield and the icons move
to represent updated information.
Once a mission is in progress you can change the waypoints. This
feature is useful if new intelligence it obtained and your original
targets have moved.
Assuming the mission hasn't started, you also have the option of
selecting your loadout. Standard loadout for the AH-64D applies: radar
and laser guided Hellfires, Stinger missiles, two types of A2G rockets,
and the 30mm chain gun. For the Mi-28 you get the Ataka radio guided
anti-tank missiles, two types of unguided rockets, Igla IR guided A2A
missiles, and two types of 30mm chain gun ammo. Loadout selection is
done through keyboard commands using the arrow keys: a bit awkward as
opposed to a mousable interface.
Mission success factors are a bit confusing at first, with
ratings based on the attainment of completion factors that are not
intuitive. Several mission types require that you only transmit "return
to base" to your flight at the final waypoint to achieve a mission
success. Still others require that all waypoints be crossed. The
destruction of specific battlefield assets does not play into the
successful completion of individual Apache Havoc missions.
Campaign
The campaign missions are very much like the dynamic missions, but with
the added dimension of a persistent battlespace that continues through
the course of many missions. "Persistent" means that the objects that
are destroyed in one mission will still be destroyed in the next.
Certain objects are replenished during the campaign, so the initial
order of battle is not set.
Campaign scoring is different than any other military simulation I've
played. Overall campaign goals are set by a percentage of attrition of
the enemies fielded assets. When the assets are reduced below a certain
level, you win. In Longbow 2
individual mission success is determined by the completion of mission
objects that include the destruction of primary and secondary goals.
Individual mission goals in the Apache Havoc campaign, as in the
dynamic missions, relate more to distance covered or transmission of
required information.
Additional campaign time is granted for each mission that results in a
successful completion. The extra time allows you to pound the enemy
even more, thus increasing your ability to reach your overall campaign
objective of reducing the enemies fielded assets. This is a novel way
of overcoming the "what impact can one human have on the virtual
battlefield?" issue. Strangely enough, I think I like this approach
since it gives the individual flyer the ability to really impact the
war.
On the downside, I did not like the way additional missions are
presented to the player. After completing a mission or jumping out of a
helo that's egressing, the campaign screen would often lack any flyable
missions for my attack group. If I am to be assigned to a particular
attack group, then the attack groups need to be a bit larger than a
couple of helos. The only way you can move to another attack group
seems to be if you crash all the aircraft in your group. I would like
to see more opportunity to transfer to different attack groups so as to
put me in closer proximity to the enemy and thus the action.
Mission Building
There currently is no single mission or campaign builder present in the
package although you do have the ability to create a mission on the fly
from within a running campaign. I found this to be a nice feature, as
the default campaign missions do not bring you in contact with the
enemy as much as I prefer. In building a campaign mission, you can use
the map interface to check your recon information and plot your
waypoints accordingly. You do not have any control over the number or
type of aircraft in your mission, though several helos always seem to
tag along.
Multiplayer
With the US release is quite fresh I am still searching for some
playmates to help me test the Internet and LAN performance. In
reporting to you I would prefer to give you a robust report rather that
simply stating that 1v1 works.
I don't personally trust the validity of reporting, but I've
read on various news groups that 1v1 on the internet works, but there
are issues with lag. LAN via IPX seems to work well, but I'm not clear
on how many players have been connected to a mission. The developer
offers that the number of human players in a multi-player game is
limited only to the available bandwidth.
Gameplay
Lack of proper wingman control is the most frustrating aspect of Apache Havoc.
You are given the ability to control your wingmen through one of three
options: FLIGHT GROUP, WINGMEN, and LOCAL BASE. Identifying voice calls
is difficult because the same voice actor is used for all flight,
wingman, base and other flight calls enormously limiting situational
awareness.
Calls to ATTACK MY TARGET generally have a good response. I
have yet, however, to have my wingmen respond to a HELP ME command.
Through the mission, wingmen generally seem to be "on rails,"
meaning that they do not attach themselves to you, the flight lead, but
to the mission at hand. Getting your base to respond is problematic as
calls for airstrikes and assistance generally go unanswered.
From what I understand, the bases will only respond if there
are assets available. Instead, some kind of acknowledgement, positive
or negative, should be given.
There is no provision to sit in the front seat co-pilot/gunner (CP/G)
position. All tasks are done from the pilot seat in the rear. Similar
to Longbow, you have access to all CP/G functions from the pilot's
position.
Overflights of enemy ground units result in widely varied
responses: one time there is no response and next time all hell breaks
loose. It would be very easy to criticize the AI here, but some
variability in aggressiveness keeps me on my toes. Hey, maybe they were
on a lunch break or playing dead?
I generally found the missions to be a challenge, even on some
of the easier settings. I really didn't find myself disinterested at
what the game had to offer other than I would have appreciated more
battlefield assets - you tend to see the same types of objects over and
over again.
Graphics Quality and Support
The most striking feature of Apache Havoc is without a doubt the
graphics. Direct 3D is the only API for Apache Havoc: Glide is not an
option. Of the two graphics cards I tested (Diamond Viper TNT and
Diamond Voodoo2 in SLI) both appeared to be excellent platforms for
running Apache Havoc. The only difference in capability between the
Voodoo 2 and the TNT was that I was able to observe the rain falling
with the TNT and the rain didn't appear with the V2.
The objects modeled in Apache Havoc are incredible. The
graphical rendering of the helicopters is without question the best in
any helo sim anywhere. My favorite effect is how the glare on the
cockpit on the outside of the helo changes as the angle of view
changes.
Other objects, such as the tanks, equal if not exceed the object
modeling of the tanks in Microprose' M1 Tank Platoon 2. Certain parts
of objects articulate, and the helo rotors bend with the various loads
placed on them. Windshield wipers work and are a nice feature when it's
raining, and like the equipment on most cars today they have two
speeds.
The terrain modeling is very appealing. Though the pallet choices
are a little unnatural, it is not as cartoonish as some other sims. And
best of all, the terrain has a significant amount of variation:
undulating surfaces, valleys, ditches, hedgerows, and trees keep things
interesting.
Yes, I said trees. The most elusive terrain item to helo fans everywhere is resident in Apache Havoc. And yes, they are tactically significant - you can terrain mask behind them to cover your ingress/egress.
Some of the transition in terrain, especially around the trees, is a
little rough, but I can understand this from a frame-rate standpoint.
The default screen size in Apache Havoc is 640x480. The 2D cockpit,
although functionally accurate, takes up much space and limits
situational awareness.
You can, of course, turn off the cockpit graphic to get the full-screen
HUD effect. If you don't mind this view, I was able to bump the
graphics up to 1024x768 on my V2 SLI or 1152x864 on my TNT.
The objects and terrain really shine at the higher resolutions. I
generally prefer 800x600, as text/MFDs become unreadable on a 17"
monitor at the higher resolutions. The only problem is that the cockpit
graphics were only rendered at 640x480, and although they will still
work at the higher resolution, the "floating cockpit" is quite
bothersome (the cockpit no longer takes up the full screen.)
Sound Quality
In general I found the sounds to be adequate, but the engine
sound was for me the most disappointing. It sounded like it could be an
actual Apache, but like the sound was sampled outside the cockpit AND
at the other end of the field. There was neither a pitch change when
throttle was applied nor any turbine whine or other miscellaneous
interior sounds.
The explosion sounds were satisfactory, as were the missiles leaving
their hardpoints. The 30mm chain gun was a bit non-specific, and didn't
at all sound like the 30mm gun I've heard in documentaries about the
Apache. It sounded more like a standard infantry M-60.
All of the radio comms received from internal and external
sources (CP/G and wingmen/bases) sounded as if they were coming from
the same voice actor. This hurts situational awareness because you are
not sure who is making the radio call. Is your CP/G is talking to you
or if the comms calls are coming from your wingmen? So, is the threat
he is reporting at YOUR nine o'clock or at the nine o'clock of a
wingman or another flight? It's difficult to know. There are
Russian-accented voices when you fly the Havoc, but the commentary is
generally the same as it is for the American side.
Realism
I've always been hesitant to vilify flight simulations for
characteristics such as the flight model. As someone who's had his
share of non-virtual flight time, I can speak to what things look like
from the air, but I cannot definitely criticize the performance of the
AH-64 or the Mi-28 since I have never flown them personally.
Having said that, what I CAN do is compare Apache Havoc to other helo sims, the laws of physics, and generally produce some commentary as to the feeling of flight in this simulation.
I was unable to find a significant difference in the way the Apache
flew vs. the Havoc. The performance was almost identical, at least to
the point of being difficult to discern any distinction in performance
from my point of view.
There were some holes in the flight model. The hover-ceiling
altitude was supposedly 4,760 meters for the Havoc, but at 6000 meters
I stopped my experiment since the bird was not about to stop climbing.
The sense of speed was adequate, but it didn't seem proportional. I
reached about 580 km/h in the Havoc after coming out of a steep dive
and apparent ground speed looked the same as at 350 km/h. Of course
it's not normal to fly a helo at jet speeds and everything below 350
kph appeared reasonable.
On full realism the helo is a challenge to fly, which I like.
The helos were a bit more difficult to fly than the Apache was in Longbow 2, but nowhere near as squirrelly as the Apache in Team Apache.
A feature called "cross coupling" allows the cyclic to be tied to the
tail rotor - I recommend keeping this feature ON. When this feature is
turned off you have to supply a tremendous about of right rudder to
keep the helo going straght. Once you've built up enough forward
momentum the torque effect becomes less noticeable, but it makes
holding a hover next to impossible. Cross coupling will make your life
easier.
In general, I found the weapons systems and avionics to be quite nice.
At times I was able to lock up objects using my FLIR/DVO/DTV combo, but
not with the FCR radar. This is a bit confusing when the item is a T-80
tank that is out in the open and I suspect a bug here.
Line of sight is critical in ground warfare, and tanks hiding
behind the hedgerows cannot be locked up easily which is appropriate.
You must be careful not to over-fly their position because if they are
feeling feisty they'll frag you pretty good.
Small Crawling Insects
Apache Havoc presented a mixed bag of results on my two test
systems. Initially I installed the software on my primary gaming
platform (P2 450). For this system, Apache Havoc performed
well, a nice change of pace from recent sim releases. I guess we have
the Brits to thank as beta testers for this, since it appears that the
initial British release had quite a few more problems than version
1.1c. There really were no "show stopping" bugs for me.
My first problem occurred when I loaded up the included Thrustmaster
F-22/TQS file. When I jumped into the game I noticed some strange
keyboard behaviors. Taking a closer look at the Thrustmaster
programming, I noticed a liberal use of the /p /r (press-release) key
combinations. This combination can be tricky if every press is not
followed by a release. After I created my own HOTAS file by removing
most of the /p /r sequences the problem went away.
On one flight I noticed a UH-60 hanging in the air at about 100 feet
with its rotors not spinning. Other items, such as the lack of hover
hold, is either a bug or a misprint in the documentation. Apparently
hover hold does not work if you have a HOTAS throttle - it only works
if you are using the keyboard for the throttle.
When I attempted to install the software on my older system
(P1/MMX 233) I continued to receive a GPF during the simulation
initialization phase. I tried several things to reduce the likelihood
that my system was the culprit, but I was unable to get it to load
properly and I eventually gave up. If this machine had been my only
gaming platform I would have been quite disappointed.
Summary
In producing this review of Apache Havoc, my intent was to
comment on how well the components of the game actually worked rather
than to focus on realism or comparison-type issues.
Although my default attack vector is from a hard-core aspect
angle, I realize that most people who play simulations are not of the
hard-core variety. I tend to think that Empire/Razorworks hit the nail
on the head in terms of meeting their intended goals and delivering a
sim that offers a little something for everyone.
I was very impressed with the object modeling, terrain engine, campaign
engine, and to a lesser extent the weapons and avionics systems. I was
disappointed with the lack of control over the AI wingmen and fire
support, 640x480 cockpits, and voice comms.
I'm glad that Empire/Razorworks decided to hold off on the US
release while problems were worked out, but there are still areas that
require attention. A bit more time before release would have been
appropriate.
