Normal
Strong
Stongest
No, I hadn't as it happened, they are still on Strong. Oops...!Originally Posted by Rick Rawlings
I dunno, I've been surprised by it before, particularly in a sharp turn near the ground, it killed me! As for shooting down the Albatrosses, did you switch your gun strength back, I run out of ammo by the fourth plane!
RR
I'll try to keep it brief.
I've pulled the wings off N11's and N17's in evasive maneuvers when I really and honestly wasn't going all that fast. In game I won't even think about diving to attack on low planes. FOR ME, the Nieuports come apart just a wee bit too easily. Others maybe not enough. Overall, I find there to be perhaps a bit too much drag in the FM... But defer to others who have really flown a biplane.
As far as gun strength goes, I voted Strong, but I would not make 'Normal" any harder. Those who like it play it there. AI take a h_LL of a lot of bullets before I see them compromised, whereas I take a few hits (AT LONG RANGE I might add!) and my plane handles like crap immediately.
Does the AI fly at an easier level of the Flight Model? I know that is the case in some sims, and would explain my observation above.
Thanks for listening! Your invitation to comment appreciated!!!
..... thanks for asking us. You really do not have to, this I know well.
Sometimes WM, went you post threads like this, I think you like being punished ...
LOL!!!!
WF2
I posted this in another thread, but just day before yesterday I flew a Spad XIII too hard and died from structural failure. I didn't do an external view quickly enough, so I don't know exactly what happened, but something cracked and I lost all control authority and augured in. No EA had shot me at that point.
I'm starting to think maybe something's porked in my install. I just had a 1 vs 6 AlbIIIs, me in a Nupe17. I collided with an Alb's tail and lost the tip of my lower right wing, such that the v-strut was just hanging in the air. "Great" I thought, "now I'll be able to break the bugger." Well, I couldn't. I chucked that plane around as hard as I could, pulled tight turns (hard with the plane as damaged as it was) and it held up. That was after a dive from about 1000ft to build up some good speed.
How can the game be running perfectly, and all the settings are correct, but one component (stress) is non-functional. Is that possible?
Can somebody else please dive a Nupe17 from a good height, vertically down at full throttle, and tell me what happens before/after they pull up as hard as they can?
..... thanks for asking us. You really do not have to, this I know well.
Sometimes WM, went you post threads like this, I think you like being punished ...
LOL!!!!
WF2
Lol yes and no - I see these things coming - starts slowly and builds I see FM/DM threads quite a few now (as expected this phase is no different to others) and the only way is to ask openly - as we can change stuff but want to do it on a majority basis.
When there were threads about poor FPS I did the same - 75% said they were happy....
Let the numbers tell it - no need for lengthy debates.
WM
Okay, I just had to try this, since I'm one of the ones who says I've seen structural failures.
SO...QC, enlisted Sgt. Test Pilot, in a Nupe 17, and started at 10,000. Put her in a vertical dive at full power. She was the devil to pull out, and there were warnings I'd overstressed my aircraft, but nothing failed. I threw her around the sky. She was fine.
So, started again in Spad XIII, the one that I think folded on me the other night. Again, I reached ridiculous speeds (almost 250) and she held together. Still didn't roll very well :-}. So I threw here about and then crack and she started spiraling in. So I jumped outside the plane to look and couldn't see any damage. But you know what I did see? An EA, apparently one that just shot at me without me noticing. Little bugger must have followed me in the vertical dive. So, inconclusive.
Started again, this time a Nupe 11 (the one with the pitiful little excuse of a bottom wing). Reached 200. Warnings. Even slower to pull out of the dive, but once out, she was fine. Threw her around. Just fine.
Okay, so now I don't know anymore. Maybe the Spad XIII folded up on me the other night from a quick burst of enemy fire I didn't even know was around me. It couldn't have been more than a handful of bullets.
I think it's time for Sgt. Test Pilot to do some extensive flying without enemies in a number of planes and see what happens.
It won't do it in a dive, probably because of compressability simulation left over from CFS3, you can barely pull out at all! Just to check and make sure I wasn't crazy, I pulled some hard turns near the ground. I'm sure they still need to be more fragile, but it IS possible
I cannot break the Neup 17 even from 15000.
Thanks - yes they will be more fragile in 1.3 - we are doing it now...It won't do it in a dive, probably because of compressability simulation left over from CFS3, you can barely pull out at all! Just to check and make sure I wasn't crazy, I pulled some hard turns near the ground. I'm sure they still need to be more fragile, but it IS possible
:amen:
WM
Very cool Winder! Is there any truth to the compressability theory? It feels a lot like that from other WWII sims. Most WWI sims allow you to shed your wings in a big dive, especially if you try to pull out at speed, like Siggi said. This of course being the big selling point of the SPAD series, as well as, if I remember, why people like Voss prefered the Pfalz over the DVa.
Also, I suppose you considered that you should probably either weaken the planes OR strengthen the guns but not both at the same time
Hello - seen this thread a bit late. I think nearly everyone knows my views on this as it is now known i have made mods to the Dm in my install.
And I do prefer the rationale above . I've always said that I envisaged RL to be a case of flying to get behind the enemy -( and keep him from getting behind you ), as a priority, 'cos if either got close enough your number was liable to be up if he pumped a reasonable quantity of bullets in you.
Something would get hit that wouldn't do your blood circulation much good, or the structure of your plane much good. Either way, you were liable to "buy it"
By changing some values in the files, wings can come off easier, fuel tanks leak and explode easier etc.- as I've mentioned in another thread.
I'm not sure whether this changing of the values can be made scaleable or not, but if it can then it is a hell of a lot of work for someone or some number of chaps. It takes long enough to do it for your own install.
An alternative to a lot of work by Winder et al is that each individual could alter his sim to his liking ( by following a not too hard set of instructions ),
and to use the best of both worlds could do this;
1. Make a backup copy of the vanilla aircraft folder.
2. Make the changes, to their own values, and then make a backup copy of that aircraft folder.
3. Then swap them as they wish to play the sim.
As most chaps play this sim as single play, it could be down to a matter of personal choice as to which level they play it at.
Do you think this would be a reasonable option, or too convoluted for most player, Winder?
It would certainly save you a lot of work. And I'm all for that.
In my opinion the guns are just fine. The airplanes should get a little (not much) more fragile, and therefore, there should be implemented more "stylish" deaths. I would love to see mid air explosions and more wing clippings. I would love to see entire planes breaking apart from the center of the fuselage. I would love to see entire rudders coming off. I know that maybe I ask for too much but it would be a huge step forward. I would actually prefer these, including AI firing at closer range, instead of Gothas in the future.
Thanks chaps, that's a load off. Nothing worse than a suspected corrupt install when everything appears to be 100%.
Here's my pair of pennys on the matter: It's a toss up between "normal" and "strong" weapons effectiveness (strongest is just an arcade shoot em up). If the weapons effectiveness was bumped up to strong for the player and AI alike, it could skew the results of the combat. Sure, the planes go down more realistically and it would be easier for a player to down a plane and for the AI to down a player, but the combats would be shorter, giving the AI less time to get on your tail and shoot you down. As you dispatch the first quicker, it would make it easier to turn to the next and kill him. Where as on normal, with the limitations of the AI in mind, you have to give the enemy a good plastering to bring him down and take more time doing it, and his wingies have more of a chance to get on your six and kill you. If the weapons were bumped up I'd like to see the AI skill bumped up as well (if at all possible).
I hope all understand what I'm trying to say here.
BTW, Winding Man, Im glad you resolved to make the lower wings weaker.
-Rooster
Flew six QC against each enemy plane with an Alb DIII vs N17, SPAD VII and Sop Strutter. Gun settings on Strong. Then I thought about it for a bit and went here and voted.
I went for Normal. Even if I felt that Strong "felt" more "realistic" when seen in isolation I also noted that the overall feeling was that it became too easy. I'm not a very good gunner but I am getting better and manage most low-deflection shots from the Alb. Against a two-seater it would be even more a case of going in from below and behind, cutting back throttle and fire until they burn. Also, the way the AI currently fly the SPAD VII, they would die even faster than they do now. So yes, instead of increasing gunner damage I would prefer more fragility from the planes that were fragile.
Strong felt good to me. Not a turkey shoot, not emptying 19X lewis rounds from 30 feet off the tail to bring one plane down.
From my point of view....
We have the Kill-O-Meter which takes values from 1 to 10. This meter represents how easy planes crash from enemy damage in OFF. 1 is almost impossible to kill, and 10 is a walk in the park.
In the current build, when you have "Normal" selected, the meter takes the value 5.
In "Strong", it goes to 7. In "Strongest" to 10 (like shooting with a tank cannon). I believe that the value should go to 6 with Normal weapon effectiveness in future patches. Some more spectacular damage should also be nice...(AKA more planes falling apart maybe..)
Thanks guys - keep posting!
WM
Strong felt about best IMHO. Perhaps + some more plane breakup..?
As I've said, I'm a newbie, so when asked by the devs to do a test so they can tweak things based on a vote, I'm there. What fantastic support! But I am a newb, so that might color my results. I'm probably not the best shot (and you guys aiming for specific targets like the base of wings or the pilot have my awe...I'm very happy to hit somewhere on the plane!).
I've been flying strictly normal, and have no interest in strongest, so I flew a half dozen turkey shoots at strong in Pups against DIIIs (that's what I've been flying mostly lately and so am very familiar with the results on normal). At first I thought it made it too easy. But as I progressed, it seemed to me that the difference was detectable, but not huge. I flew with two wingman against flights of 5 EA mostly (just so some of the EA could be kept busy while I got the first two). I got more kills than I'm used to, and more than is realistic perhaps, but it wasn't exactly what I'd call a turkey shoot (all other settings remained the same as my usual 100 realism).
All that to say that I voted Strong, because it was fun, and didn't seem as if I just had to get a few shots into them to do damage. Some of them took a TON of hits, just like usual. Some went down easier. So I voted Strong, but really, my preference is slight, and I'm okay with either Normal or Strong as realistic....to me. :-} But Strong seemed to be a better match for the effectiveness of the AI firepower.
Thanks again for the chance to weigh in. I very much like the increased fragility promised in .3, I think.
I voted, patriot that I am. Thanks for the the poll Winder.
It's all about the occasional Critical Hits
Many of you read WWI history/fiction. Lot's of it I'm sure. Many authors who flew these biplanes in combat mention firing quick bursts in snap shots during long-odds melee and scoring critical hits to whittle down the odds in their favour, while other encounters required belts of ammo to see no kills. It's all about chance or 'luck' perhaps.
If I'm reading the general tempo of the thread:
1) improve the chances of a critical hit a bit (helps us in long odds, which I seem to get myself into quite often),
2) increase the chance of a catastrophic failure (gives us the "threatre" we crave),
3) but leave the balance of bullets to damage alone (NOT a cake walk though).
Sounds simple? Hmmm... If this became the case I would not have voted for 'Strong' as I did earlier.
RE: Nieuports... Ah! The wings come off like flies just in snap turns then, NOT a dive. Ok will change tactics till the next patch.
Well, for me, I'd say "strong" seems a tad too strong...and "normal" not quite strong enough...I'm sorry. Somewhere between "normal" and "strong" would seem to be the sweet spot, IMHO. But, if I am forced to choose of the 3 choices, then I would vote "normal"...which I did.
Hope you like fishing, Winder, as you really have opened up a can of worms!
Seriously, I sincerely appreciate your efforts and the efforts of the entire OBD team to solicit, listen, and act upon the advice of the WWI flight sim community. Of course, determining just what is the consensus of the flight sim community is the "fly in the ointment," as they say, isn't it?
My input follows: First, I am not a very good pilot, and probably an even worse shot, so I tend to play with weapons set to strong. However, I have been playing with guns set to "Normal" since the 1.25 patch. My impressions are that normal may be a bit "light" for my taste. Although I have observed pieces come off an enemy craft, this does not seem to influence the plane textures very much, other than some holes and wrinkling of the surface of the wings. I rarely, if ever, have noticed a definable structure such as a wing being broken or entirely shot off. Crashes generally consist of the enemy plane gradually losing speed and maneuverability until it drifts into the ground. I have not recently tested on "Strong," but my impression is that it did not have much of an influence on structurally integrity, instead simply accelerating the process of shooting down the enemy craft. In summary, while upping the gun strength may have some beneficial effects, especially for the less talented "fleigers" among us, I vote for some additional tweaking of the overall damage model of the airplanes in OFF to make them more likely to suffer from occasional "catastrophic structural failures."
OTOH, since realism is the overall goal of BHaH, shouldn't we aim for that, both in terms of the overall gun strength and the structural strength of the various aircraft in the sim? In other words, if "normal" is designed to reflect the actual characteristics of the real-life bullet (weight, size, muzzle speed, damage), and "strong" and "strongest" represent bullets of comparatively greater weight, size, speed, and damage, then I say leave the bullets alone and focus on the hitpoints of the various structural components of the aircraft until they are more in line with the performance and observations of contemporary aircraft of the period.
Of course, some compromise between the two may be required in order to meet the limitations of the game engine. However, I trust you and OBD will make the correct choices. Still, I don't envy your position! Thanks for listening to your purchasers input!
P.S. If you need somone to help with making text changes to the hitboxes of the various aircraft, I would be glad to help.
P.P.S. You might also consider making any changes to the structural strength of the various aircraft as a mod that can be installed or not based upon the player's preferences. There are several programs such as JonesSoft JSGME which allow the player to easily do this with just the click of a button.
Members who have read this thread: 0
Posting Permissions
CFS3
Bookmarks