Its time for feedback guys..........

[+peter01 2]

As you know, I have been working (tirelessly, I'm not kidding ) to get planes working together consistently for the 1915-16 period. probably some good, some bad, some mmmmm.......but nevertheless, trying.

 

My aims are, they work in hard, work in normal - tho I am starting to think just to do hard for this period only, with AI well behaved, AI puts up a good fight (not doing these for those interested in too easy a game, but of course Normal Mode is easier), the ai fly plane nearly as well as player usually (sometimes better!), and in terms of ability there is a progression in capability.

 

Although my AI never roll over and give up (good experience when doing my first FMs - they were absoltely hopeless!!!), the E1 will easily beat the Morane H and Ls, less easily the Avros and Martinsyde, the E3 is a better than the E1, and the Halberstadt is better than the E3 etc etc. And the reverse is true - for example it is possible but hard to win in a Morane L against the AI E1 if Ace skill level. That is, the planes are balanced for player/AI - not too easy/overdone for player, but AI is still very good.

 

Well thats maybe obvious, and I have said it before, why do I say that again ????

 

Its because it takes a good deal of work. Unfortunately every time you change the climb for example you have to redo the FM to ensure the AI does not have major problems which it can very easily, so its a very time consuming iterative process - test plane "A" performance against AI plane "B", reverse the test flying "B" plane against new "A" FM, tweak peformance, redo FM for AI problems and start again, usually many iterations (....like a dozen or two or more). Then you do all the rest - feel, fine tuning, stalls etc etc.

 

Not complaining, I do enjoy this, and am doing it for my personal game in any case..............but, I need feedback. Now especially, as there are so many planes, its hard for one person in isolation to be objective on performance, feel, too hard, too easy, problems occurring, not quite right, etc. And that feedback will make it a better game for everyone. i don't think any one person can do that without testers or feeback.

 

So whats the situation.

 

The Ateam have very kindly given me permission to do some alternative FMs for their planes for the period I am interested in, its very good of them and I think again shows their support of the game, and I appreciate this very much.

 

But some of these are tricky, take work and I really am wondering if its worth it without that feedback - do you like them or not, and more importantly what exactly?

 

So ....i'll post a beta version on the forum first for feedback . With no feedback I have to wonder whether anyone is interested in either the FM or what I am trying to achieve for the game. It just is neither satisfying nor worth it for me without that.

 

Obviously the feedback is about the FM I have done, not comparing with others and is a bit more detailed than good or bad. Preferably tried in hard mode.

 

To start attached is an alternative and completely new Fe2B FM - i think its very nice to fly, its nearly equal to the E1 in a dogfight tho different of course, AI seems good, and is very aggressive. I have not finished eg stalls, and seeking views on what other changes I could do. Not after dedicated testers necessarily !!! but just if you use it, post your thoughts.

 

Let me know, please .

 

Fe2B_DATA.txt

Edited May 30, 2007 by peter01

[+Tailspin 3]

Peter, I think you are doing a fantastic job. I think the reason I don't make detailed comments is because I fly on NORMAL most of the time. I do so because there are so many planes that I like to fly that aren't set up for HARD FM. As you know flying on NORMAL tends to even the playing field even more so differences in FMs tend to be negated. In other words, when you fly NOMAL all the time you can kill about any AI opponent in any plane you choose...within specific time periods that is. HOWEVER, since you asked, I will switch over to HARD and give em a shot. May take a while since I'll have to fly a few to get a better idea of the differences.

 

One more concern about doing a LOT of work now is TK's comments here:

 

http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=4319

 

The next patch may change things again.

[Firecage 1]

Hey pete, sorry but I have just been in the FLanders plane fest more for a while now and have't had much time to respond to your planes at all and Im sorry about that.

 

I have been using them to test the campaign with a ton and they all seem even as much as I can tell. The only problem im having is some of the other planes out there for their dates seems to be way OP'd and I have just been modding where planes are being upgraded date wise so some of the planes wont be so OP'd.

 

I think your planes have been some of the best add on planes that have come out for this game. I really like the early war planes myself so I am VERY happey to see so many of these year planes released by you.

 

I have been doing ALL of my testing on Hard FM and I do like all the wierd quirky things in the FMs. I view them in the same way the pilots probably did back then. THe pilots didn't know what quirks the new planes might have and just had to learn them as they flew and make the best of it. My biggest deal is the early planes don't have much roll rate at all, which is probably close to the real things but Im always trying to twist my stick past the end of its travel all the time. Its nothing wrong with your FMs at all its just me 8)

 

Please keep up the good work you have been producing and I promise if I see anything out of the usual I will try and send you a PM..

 

[gambit168 27]

Het ya

I like yer Fm's I fly full real and all the types sit well within there specific flight envelopes nicely, none show any nasty vices, on a note for AI, I saw somewhere (Maxrollforcombat )and i changed it to =360 but i have yet to see my quary span roll or go inverted ,or most things you would half expect of yourself in , lets say a full real server online, Im not sure if its a case of "you can lead a horse to water", but it looks like all the perameters are there to make the AI (feel) like they are fighting for there lives, I just dont like to be sure if i put a lead out there it'll fill the cockpit with lead, but im sure you've had all the same thought's yourself

 

doin a great Job M8 keep plugin away, infact I mostly fly 2 view the skin im doin but when i fly 1 with an FM of yours , i tend to see the mission through be4 droppin back in2 photoshop,The Fm has a great deal to do with that choice to stay and enjoy the dogfighting first

cheers m8

[+Tailspin 3]

One quick observation on the Fe2B. The rudder doesn't seem to do much. If you apply full rudder the plane turns only a couple of degrees and then just stops.

[Southside Bucky 1]

Count me in Peter...Your work improves the game no end!

 

Regards.

 

Bucky.

[markjhnstn 5]

I really appreciated your work on the Martinsyde. I found it's tail-heaviness a real problem before in dogfights. I like that particular Bort aircraft and you have made it even more fun to fly.

[+peter01 2]

Wow, thanks guys, encouragement much appreciated (probably needed too), and from many that I have a lot of time for as well.......thanks

 

I'll respond to some of the comments a little later when more time, but, again re Fe2B - rudder, good point Tailspin (this whole rudder thing is interesting, and will post a bit more also on this), but what else??

 

Is it too good performance wise?? that is, should it be nearly equal to E1? its not quite I think, but the extra gunner evens up the odds. Is it too light feeling for a big plane etc, or is that good in terms of fun to fly? Other things?

 

I know most of you don't play the game daily or continuously, but please let me know before i put finishing touches on plane - I'll give it a week or so.

Edited May 31, 2007 by peter01

[+Tailspin 3]

I'll fly it more over the next day or two to get more variety in opponents. I think maybe the Fe2b was a better performer than the Eindeckers as it wasn't introduced into service until Sept. 15 and it contributed to the end of the Fokker Scourge. The fact that it stayed in service long after it was useful as a fighter speaks a lot to its "flyability".

 

As far as everyone providing input....I do think we can and should discuss this on the forums and not via. PM. Comparing ideas should be productive. I don't think anyone in this group is going to take it the wrong way.

[+peter01 2]

lots of comments/replies I want to make, next post, but Tailspin has raised a number of good points, so:

 

I'll fly it more over the next day or two to get more variety in opponents.

 

Thanks and appreciate that, but don't go out of your way testing, really......prefer you and others to just enjoy the game, not test my FMs, but just want some feedback on the planes as player or AI.

 

As far as everyone providing input....I do think we can and should discuss this on the forums and not via. PM. Comparing ideas should be productive. I don't think anyone in this group is going to take it the wrong way.

 

I agree completely. And you can say whatever you like about mine - i mean it. But no comparison with other FMs please - its not necessary, and allowing alternate FMs means they love the game/support the game and are happy in providing choices to players. But they are opening themselves up to criticism they don't deserve - because if you like mine (not everyone does for some strange reason), you could inadvertently also say its better than so and so's. Of course we have new members, people do quick posts, english isn't always the first language (isn't the internet grand) etc etc so we all accept this, but believe me it can be a little malicious at times. And it can hurt.

 

I think the reason I don't make detailed comments is because I fly on NORMAL most of the time.

 

yep can understand, its the way it was - but once I complete this - its only about a month away I'd guess, you can fly say 1915-April 1917 in Hard or Normal Modes (not sure about 2 seaters, may be next!). For this period unless your a beginner you should fly Hard. Hard isn't that hard, stalls aren't bad for most planes, but there are other differences (see rudder comments below) that make it a better experience I think - each to their own I guess, and have to say if it only worked in hard that would be just as bad as just working in Normal.

 

One quick observation on the Fe2B. The rudder doesn't seem to do much. If you apply full rudder the plane turns only a couple of degrees and then just stops.

 

Thanks, in this case just overlooked that....its one of the reasons I wanted feedback.

 

But the rudder stuff is interesting, for me at least. You can get very good player planes by overdoing it, I'm not too big on a lot of rudder, but some planes need it, this one definitely should be better - its not the Control Surfaces section, the push back is due to forces in the FM. Thinking about it, I should give the Halbs more too!!

 

One problem tho is that the rudder works differently for Hard and Normal - wish TK would change that a bit. Playing a plane in Normal that has say slower controlled rudder on Hard FM, can result in huge amounts of rudder and fishtailing - I set my joystick to sensitive, deadzone minimal, so any twist and I'm yawing all over the place in Normal. Not saying it cannot be done to work well in both Hard and Normal - some FMs do this very well - but it compromises other things. I guess this is one example were as i have said a few times you need to compromise between Hard and Normal.

 

 

One more concern about doing a LOT of work now is TK's comments

 

Yes, but hopefully he will improve how the AI responds as it approaches the FM specified stall in the vertical (probably all stall behavior). If he can improve this (I'm sure he can) it will reduce many of the problems prevalent now with weird AI behavior. It will make a difference, but I'd guess only minor changes if anything for my or anyone elses FMs - it'll just make the AI both better and well behaved. If I'm wrong and it requires more work, short of redoing the FMs from scratch, I'll fix the ones I have done.

Edited May 31, 2007 by peter01

[Firecage 1]

As far as everyone providing input....I do think we can and should discuss this on the forums and not via. PM. Comparing ideas should be productive. I don't think anyone in this group is going to take it the wrong way.

 

 

Ok im going to try and be very careful here. I think everyone is a bit gun shy on posting comments and not starting a flame war. Things have been VERY touchy lately in this forum area. I am guessing you all are like me and people are PMing and not saying much in open forums.

 

The comparing of ideas and meeting on a common goal is the idea but It hasn't worked out that way quite often. I im totally guilty of putting stuff in PMs to make sure no one gets offended. The slightest thing has been blown way outta bounds and then some other things go un-noticed. I will try and do more about posting the idea out front and hopefully I wont get my head chopped off. I do think I have seen a few parties move towards more open approcach to downloads and sharing lately. I think its great that CA is providing the forum space ot let designers and such get a spot of their own. Great idea!

 

We will just have to try and see if we can keep the ship on an even line and not let past things repeat.

[+peter01 2]

Well since your all been so encouraging .... here's an alternate Dh2. Aladar and Charles have not only given me permission to post this FM, but both were also extremely encouraging - thank you.

 

Its a completely new FM. Charles did an excellent job initially, it was an early 1916 plane, when all we had then were basically 1918 planes, and looking back now, its performance was and probably is about right in comparison. But then I and others started making super planes .....oh well, best move forward.

 

DH2_data.txt

 

This is last one for early 1916 period that i'd like feedback on at moment, if you tell me whats good whats not performance etc its enough at least for the 1915 to mid 1916 period for me to understand how you think planes should be, feel and relative performance. by all means comment on others too if you want.

 

This is not completely ready - stalls and fine tuning feel - and whatever comes out from feedback, so its beta, but gee very flyable. In time to help end Laton's Fokker Scourge, and in Eindeckers you will have a good challenge, the Dh2 AI is nearly as good an AI as those menancing Fokkers (relatively, its a more capable plane of course). As with Fe2B i'll leave it for a week or so to get feedback before finalising.

 

i have to say there have been many great planes done by a lot of talented people, but the Dh2 is still my personal favourite.

Edited May 31, 2007 by peter01

[+Tailspin 3]

lots of comments/replies I want to make, next post, but Tailspin has raised a number of good points, so:

Thanks and appreciate that, but don't go out of your way testing, really......prefer you and others to just enjoy the game, not test my FMs, but just want some feedback on the planes as player or AI.

 

Not a problem. I'm retired and I usually play a couple of hours a day. Although I am working on a little mod of my own, testing it requires flying.

 

I agree completely. And you can say whatever you like about mine - i mean it. But no comparison with other FMs please - its not necessary, and allowing alternate FMs means they love the game/support the game and are happy in providing choices to players. But they are opening themselves up to criticism they don't deserve - because if you like mine (not everyone does for some strange reason), you could inadvertently also say its better than so and so's. Of course we have new members, people do quick posts, english isn't always the first language (isn't the internet grand) etc etc so we all accept this, but believe me it can be a little malicious at times. And it can hurt.

 

Hmmmmm.......there is no honest reply I can give that won't hurt someone's feelings.

 

yep can understand, its the way it was - but once I complete this - its only about a month away I'd guess, you can fly say 1915-April 1917 in Hard or Normal Modes (not sure about 2 seaters, may be next!). For this period unless your a beginner you should fly Hard. Hard isn't that hard, stalls aren't bad for most planes, but there are other differences (see rudder comments below) that make it a better experience I think - each to their own I guess, and have to say if it only worked in hard that would be just as bad as just working in Normal.

 

Agree. As far as I can tell your FMs work equally well in both modes.

 

Thanks, in this case just overlooked that....its one of the reasons I wanted feedback.

 

But the rudder stuff is interesting, for me at least. You can get very good player planes by overdoing it, I'm not too big on a lot of rudder, but some planes need it, this one definitely should be better - its not the Control Surfaces section, the push back is due to forces in the FM. Thinking about it, I should give the Halbs more too!!

 

I tend to think that the importance of rudder input and how it affects manouverability (ie. induced roll and turn rate) is often overlooked. People complained loudly about the original SPAD and how you couldn't roll it without spinning. You certainly could but it required rudder input to keep the nose up. In fact I though the orignal FMs (pre-patch for the stock planes) were pretty good and only needed a little boost in rudder authority to make them even better.

 

One problem tho is that the rudder works differently for Hard and Normal - wish TK would change that a bit. Playing a plane in Normal that has say slower controlled rudder on Hard FM, can result in huge amounts of rudder and fishtailing - I set my joystick to sensitive, deadzone minimal, so any twist and I'm yawing all over the place in Normal. Not saying it cannot be done to work well in both Hard and Normal - some FMs do this very well - but it compromises other things. I guess this is one example were as i have said a few times you need to compromise between Hard and Normal.

 

As I said. Looks like you have that part figured out.

 

Yes, but hopefully he will improve how the AI responds as it approaches the FM specified stall in the vertical (probably all stall behavior). If he can improve this (I'm sure he can) it will reduce many of the problems prevalent now with weird AI behavior. It will make a difference, but I'd guess only minor changes if anything for my or anyone elses FMs - it'll just make the AI both better and well behaved. If I'm wrong and it requires more work, short of redoing the FMs from scratch, I'll fix the ones I have done.

 

I agree. If he gets the AI stall behavior straightned out it will greatly improve the sim.

[+peter01 2]

sorry, another war & peace effort.....

 

Can you make a new FM for the L63 zeppelin ???

The AI is really bad with the zeppelin.... the computer always crash the zeppelin into the ground :-(

 

BTW, i have played a few battles between Moranes and Fokkers E. III and they were funny and great.

 

You can make anything fly alligator devil........redoing the zeppelin is a good idea and hinch I think is okay with that, but want to finish the things I have started first, maybe couple of months.

 

doin a great Job M8 keep plugin away, infact I mostly fly 2 view the skin im doin but when i fly 1 with an FM of yours , i tend to see the mission through be4 droppin back in2 photoshop,The Fm has a great deal to do with that choice to stay and enjoy the dogfighting first

 

Thanks gambit, very nice of you to write that, much appreciated. You are right I think, you can do something to change the AI behavior, but some things don't work as well as others. BTW, where are the new skins??? Each and evryone you did was a work of art.

 

I really appreciated your work on the Martinsyde.

 

thanks markjhnstn, i like this too (a lot of aussies used to fly it, so I am biased), and borts model has a real and sorta worn out look that seems to suit it.

 

Count me in Peter...Your work improves the game no end!

 

thanks Bucky - now, if your planning on a zepplin mission I'll move an FM for it up on my list of things to do

 

Hey pete, sorry but I have just been in the FLanders plane fest more for a while now and have't had much time to respond to your planes at all and Im sorry about that.

 

sounds like you and me have a similar issue too, Firecage, in that we are both trying to get things balanced for various reasons. this would have to be good for the game. With dates and availability, was it Bucky??? that started with a list - probably he seems one of our resident WWI experts - maybe should get some agreement, I am happy to redo all FMs availability and dates, put in one pack (with folders so you just drop in the Objects folder) to go with the campaign if thats the issue, at least for 1915-16 period? Of course doesn't include Nieups or bombers, and if people don't use it thats fine, but they will just get a different experience I guess?

Edited May 31, 2007 by peter01

[+peter01 2]

I agree completely. And you can say whatever you like about mine - i mean it. But no comparison with other FMs please - its not necessary, and allowing alternate FMs means they love the game/support the game and are happy in providing choices to players. But they are opening themselves up to criticism they don't deserve - because if you like mine (not everyone does for some strange reason), you could inadvertently also say its better than so and so's. Of course we have new members, people do quick posts, english isn't always the first language (isn't the internet grand) etc etc so we all accept this, but believe me it can be a little malicious at times. And it can hurt.

 

Hmmmmm.......there is no honest reply I can give that won't hurt someone's feelings.

 

Sorry Tailspin, writing too much and wasn't clear mixing things up (I was right about people doing quick posts and inadvertently not expressing it well, me in this case, and in the same post too!!!)................................ the "you" is not "you" at all but "people". And I agree with what you (you in this case!) said earlier about discussing things more openly 110% - its what i want too, and not in PMs.

 

...and yep, people can say negative things about my FMs (they probably wont, I'm safe i think for a while )

 

It was just my thoughts on everybody with feedback, the quote above should read like this:

 

I agree completely. And people can say whatever they like about mine - i mean it. But I'd prefer they didn't comparie mine with other FMs please - its not necessary, and allowing alternate FMs means those that have given me permission show they love the game/support the game and are happy in providing choices to players. But they do open themselves up indirectly to criticism they don't deserve - because if some people like mine (not everyone does for some strange reason!!!), they could inadvertently also say its better than so and so's. Of course we have new members, people do quick posts, english isn't always the first language (isn't the internet grand) etc etc so we all accept this, but believe me it can be a little malicious at times. And it can hurt.

Edited May 31, 2007 by peter01

[don246 65]

Hi Peter Have just requested a transfer from RB to FE to try your FE2b FM DATA seems good to me it did end the Focker scourge along with the DH2 ( will try later with the DH2 my commanding officer says I spend too much time in the sky and have to do some decorating NO not pilots) as im no expert on WW1 planes I did find it difficult to aim using the sights the bullets on mine go to the left of the plane, the guy in front is a much better shot than me. Can any one tell me the range of the guns the AI guy in front shoots at the enemy at over half a mile away.

 

My Osprey book allied aviation of WW1 says the FE2b top level speed of 91.5 mph at sea level and the first 50 built at Boulton Paul I understand thats Woverhampton in the west midlands, in all 1,939 exaples including the FE2a were built

 

Keep up the good work I for one like your FM on the FE2b

 

DON

[+Tailspin 3]

don246. If you look in the Fe2b folder and open up the data.ini there is a [Gunner] section. There's a GunRange=2000 entry. This is in meters and I think this is the maximum range the Gunner will open fire on a target. Realistically it shoul be no more than 500, IMHO. I haven't tried changing the value myself but why don't you give it a try if you have time. I'd be interested in the results.

 

peter. I know you weren't speaking directly to me, although the shoe does fit sometimes. I was thinking more along the lines that we, as a community, need to try and get away from the feeling of tippy-toeing through a minefield everytime we want to comment about someone's work. BTW...I don't think its OK for people to say whatever they want. We do have rules here. Neither extreme is healthy.

[Southside Bucky 1]

Hi Peter.

 

Been trying out the Fee FM...Over and above what Tailspin has correctly pointed out regarding the rudder, overall it's not bad. Just to confirm what you've already stated, it does need to feel heavier and less responsive. The stability is good though.

Again, Tailspin's right about the gunner's firing distance, but he (the gunner) also needs to aim and fire a bit faster too...Is this possible?

 

Thanks for your kind words about the A/C dates and availability list, but it wasn't me. I would of course be happy to help with any questions you (or anyone else) might have though...Quite a few of the add on planes are remiss in this respect.

 

Funny you should mention a Zeppelin mission, I tried creating one soon after the Warneford, Morane L skin was released, but the Zep FM put paid to that.

 

Hope this helps, I'll try out the DH2 later tonight.

 

Regards.

 

Bucky.

[raven-1 0]

fantastic! ive been waiting for someone to do the dh-2!cant wait to get off work to try it out,along with firecages new plane fest!you guys are doing a great job, nobody knows how these planes really flew, but i think your pretty close!cheers!

[don246 65]

Hi Tailspin cant find [Gunner] in the Data ini of the FE2B only this

 

/ Internal Guns ---------------------------------

 

[FixedGun]

SystemType=FIXED_GUN

GunTypeName=303CAL_LEWIS_MK2

InputName=FIRE_PRIMARY_GUN

GunGroup=1

MuzzlePosition=0.3354,2.0362,0.2258

AimAngles=0.0,0.0,0.0

MaxAmmo=97

NumReloads=4

ReloadTime=6.0

EjectShells=TRUE

EjectPosition=0.35,1.25,0.21

EjectVelocity=1.0,0.25,0.0

MinExtentPosition=0.3,2.0,0.2

MaxExtentPosition=0.4,0.5,0.4

GunFireAnimationID=5

 

[ForwardGun]

SystemType=FLEXIBLE_GUN

GunTypeName=303CAL_LEWIS_MK2

MuzzlePosition=0.0000,3.0489,0.0296

MaxAmmo=97

TracerLoading=5

BurstAmount=10

NumReloads=7

ReloadTime=6.0

GunnerID=1

EjectShells=FALSE

EjectPosition=

EjectVelocity=

MinExtentPosition=-0.1,2.5,-0.1

MaxExtentPosition= 0.1,1.9,0.1

GunFireAnimationID=6

 

Any ideas the AI gunner in the front shoots from 0.6 nm (im going to sack him for wasting bullets)

 

Don

[Nicholas Bell 117]

also needs to aim and fire a bit faster too...Is this possible?

 

One way to make the gunner fire more often (or less) is to adjust the following rate values. Higher values means the gunner will rotate and elevate quickly and get on target. Bump them up to 60 and you may be better served by your gunner

 

In the Fe2B_Data.ini:

 

// Crew ---------------------------------------------------------

 

[Pilot]

SystemType=PILOT_COCKPIT

SeatID=1

PilotModelName=WWIpilot

PilotHeadNodeName=head

Position=0.00,0.7926,0.60

MinExtentPosition=-0.32,1.0,-0.3

MaxExtentPosition= 0.32,0.50, 0.8

HasArmor=TRUE

ArmorMaterial=STEEL

Armor[REAR].Thickness=25

 

[Gunner]

SystemType=GUNNER_STATION

SeatID=2

GunnerID=1

PilotModelName=

GunnerBodyNodeName=

SetCockpitPosition=FALSE

Position=0.0,-1.02,0.95

MinExtentPosition=-0.32,2.2,-0.7

MaxExtentPosition= 0.32,1.7, 0.2

PitchModelNodeName=Lewis_F

YawModelNodeName=Lewis_F

GunRange=2000

PitchAngleRate=25

MaxPitch=25

MinPitch=-25

DefaultPitchAngle=5

YawLimited=TRUE

YawAngleRate=25

MaxYaw=45

MinYaw=-45

DefaultYawAngle=0

[+Tailspin 3]

I took the DH2 on a couple of missions. One against Pfalz EIIIs...slaughtered them as expected. And another against Alb. DIIs...got shot down. Way more difficult against them...as expected. Looks like another good job, Peter.

[+peter01 2]

Thanks guy, just the sort of things I was after - great feedback. And congratulations on your transfer Don, probably many of us tend to move around a bit too, all the games have good and bad points.

 

Its funny, but when you do FMs sometimes its real hard to look at it objectively - you get a mindset....probably because it took some work to fly well, and you don't want to stuff it up.

 

So in summary....Fe2B probably should be more capable, think I was looking at this being a match for E1 when it should be at least a match or more for E3, so it can be a reasonable opponent flying against opposition up to Albs.

 

So, my thoughts now are:

 

Increase climb a bit - makes a big difference to capability for both player and AI

 

Improve rudder response

 

Improve gunner response, reduce range (good idea Don). Probably also change where bullets go too when fired by player -I find it very hard to hit anything myself.

 

On feel, a little less responsive, slightly heavier?

 

Keep comments coming, I won't have time to redo till next week anyhow, and let me know about Dh2 too please. Even small observations can lead to big improvements. Much appreciated.

[Southside Bucky 1]

Yo Nicholas...Thanks for that!

 

Tried 60, still too slow. Ended up at 90...Seems good to me.

 

Lowered the fire range too, 2000 is way too high. After a bit of experimenting: 500, 700, then 900, It seemed about right at 1000.

 

Nice one mate!

 

 

Hi Peter.

 

Regarding the DH2. IMO the original FM is pretty good and only needs a little tweaking. The one thing that definitely does need improving is its turning speed. At the moment, I think it's being out turned by all the Eindekker's which isn't correct considering they're all "wing warpers". The engine torque would've made a right turn faster than one to the left though.

Also, not sure if you can incorporate spins, but the DH2 was quite tricky to fly, being prone to (a recoverable) spin if the pilot wasn't careful.

 

Cheers.

 

Bucky.

[+peter01 2]

Bucky, thanks and you raised a lot of really interesting points, to me for sure.

 

I was going to reply in detail, but then I realised just need to clarify first that when you say Dh2 cannot outturn Eindeckers, is this as player or ai or both, and in Hard I guess? The situation and solution is different depending on that. If it was as player you could not outturn Eindeckers, could you try flying Eindeckers against Dh2 and let me know....in your own time of course, no rush.