I'm not much of an elitist, to the contrary in fact. Never the less i can still see problems in such a system, but they are mostly practical ones.
On one hand, i don't really mind flying alongside or against people with a couple of automated functions while i have none, as long as (like you mentioned) we all stay in cockpit view, no icons and the list of automated settings is not over the top.
On the other hand, this system could actually leave the pilot with the relaxed difficulty settings at more of a disadvantage than the full difficulty pilot. For example, how many different stall recovery techniques will an AI be able to use? How many different variations of engine management routines per type? What kind of skill level will the helping AI be? How can you learn your airframe if you are not allowed to make mistakes? Also, supposing that the AI routines are indeed variable enough to give you a bit of unpredictability, how will you accurately judge your aircraft's performance when you see it behaving differently in a series of similar events?
By having an AI routine heavily modulate your flying to keep you safe, you've effectively put yourself in a position where you are as predictable as the AI.
I think the practical problem behind this is that a more experienced pilot can still shoot you down and on top of that, you have reduced control over how your aircraft performs and most of all, reduced feedback from it, which is essentially what helps you learn.
There are situations where this system would be helpful, but that would be mostly dedicated training events/missions/servers where the "rookies" fly alongside the "veterans" and gradually soak up experience until they can go full real themselves. With such a scope in mind, it could in fact be useful.
Just as everything else, if it makes it in it should be an option and not a mandatory game mechanic. If there are servers willing to mix realism settings, then the admin would for example flag certain settings in the console as selectable by the user and keep the rest adjusted according to his desire. If on the other hand he doesn't want to mix them up, he would simply flag none of it as user selectable.
For the reasons i outlined above, i think that the list of automated functions you suggest is a bit large to see any widespread use apart from training. I can't see a lot of full-switch players willing to participate, as a part will consider the odds stacked against them, another part will deny it on a matter of principle, some will object to it out of pure elitism and finally, my personal reason is that it takes away the challenge.
That's not only on the part of the pilot receiving the AI help, but on my part too, as it will feel like fighting against the AI whenever someone on relaxed settings pulls too many Gs in front of me.
Sure, if he pulls too much he will stall, snap roll, bleed 100mph of speed and loose 500 feet of altitude, but i know better than to cut my throttle and follow him if i'm not 100% sure i can kill him with a single snapshot. Otherwise i'm getting myself set up for attack by someone else, because in order to follow him i also have to slow down by 100mph and drop 500ft lower. What that effectively means is that despite his clumsy technique, he has managed to evade my firing pass and has gained anywhere between 5 and 20 seconds to escape depending on what each one of us flies, speeds and altitude that the engagement is taking place. If the AI kicks in just as he starts to push the airframe and limits him to a 2.5G relaxed break, i'm simply going to pull a bit of lead and fill him full of holes.
It could be like shooting fish in barrel and i'm no hotshot by any means.
What could maybe work is a single difficulty setting for automatic startup/shutdown that would be a sub-setting of realistic systems management. That could work pretty much like Black Shark, with you sitting back while the AI goes through the motions and then it would only be limited to starting up and shutting down engine,radios and whatever other systems your plane might have, useful only at mission start and after you land and exit the runway.
In such a way, if you want to you can start things manually, or if you don't or happen to be trying a new airframe you can simply press the "engine on" key, but this should again come with a drawback. For example, a quick and dirty but still safe manual start up will be faster than having the AI going lazily through the entire checklist. An automatic one will be by the book, while a manual one you can do as you like.
For example, if the weather is too hot or too cold, the "by-the-book" settings the AI uses might fail to start the engine on the first try or quickly have it overheat before you even start taxiing respectively. A manual start up on the other hand is different if you take a look at your gauges.
If you see the outside temperature gauge in your cockpit indicating cold weather, you can either prime the engine a few more times, or if you have electric carb heaters you can give it some heat to help it start (not sure on the last one).
If you on the other hand see that the weather is too hot, it will start easily and with fewer strokes of the primer. The caveat is that the AI's by-the-book procedure of x amount of priming strokes for a standard temperature, might result in over-priming in a hotter one. It's still flooding the engine with the same amount of fuel but the hotter,rarified air will not be enough to burn it, requiring more revolutions of the starter motor until the excess fuel is pumped through the engine unburnt and out the exhaust, until it can finally start. With a manual start you can probably get it right 99% of the time after you develop a feel for your aircraft during your first 3-4 sorties, plus you can open the cowl flaps a bit more before starting to make sure you don't overheat just by starting up and sitting on the tarmac waiting for your turn to take-off.
It may sound awfully complicated to read, but would probably be a difference of a few seconds to clear the excess fuel. So, the AI would manage to start the engine in 10 seconds from the time the starter is engaged, while a manual start-up could work a mere two seconds after the starter is engaged. In any case, seconds count and it would be an incentive for people in a hurry to learn how to do it so they can get rolling about half a minute faster in total.
|