just an update

[+peter01 2]

great to see the forums buzzing with activity

 

thought I'd give you an update on what I'm up to....abd have been quite busy on FE

 

i did finish/improve the tripe, pup (better rudder), fe2b (a beaut), and the dh2 (improved, eliminated stalling/looping)

 

anyway, started playing the game a lot more as most planes were ready finally, at least for me in the 1915-16 period, and while doing this did a lot of tweaking of the planes for feel (getting good at this, have finally figured out how to do this relatively easily without affecting the ai - a major issue for me in past), including decent rudder for many of the planes, optimising ai parameters in the FMs, and reducing capability of earlier planes (don't worry tho, still nice to fly and not harder, just probably a whole lot better).

 

i'll probably release a set in the next few weeks - just relooking at consistency. I think it was Polovski of OFF fame that said he almost lost all his hair from tweaking the FMs for consistency in OFF Phase 2 - I can relate to that, tho luckily still have a full head of hair!!

Edited July 5, 2007 by peter01

[Firecage 1]

 

For me the bad part is the Einstein Hair I get working on those kinda things.

[+Tailspin 3]

Thanks a lot Peter. I've one request...the A-Team's Albatros DIII. They like to fight in the vertical, which is good, but they usually wind up hanging on their props at less than 50mph...sometimes a lot less. I know TK is getting ready to release a DIII with the next update but maybe there is a quick fix? BTW....You do know that once you've gotten WWI perfected we're going to get you started on the WWII FM's next. :yes:

[gambit168 27]

great news peter

I skinned the tripe and the dh2 is almosted finished

and the camel needs 2 be a bit less twitchy ,or maybe its my joystick ?!!!

as they all seemed fine be4 the second patch , then the pup tripe n camel became very nervous, and sensative 2 the slightist input

cool news though m8

cheers

[+peter01 2]

Thanks guys....

 

mmmm, re Alb D3, haven't got that far in the war yet!!!

 

you probably won't believe this, but I do like the 1917 - 18 period best actually -but somehow got caught up in the early war! Been good though, quite different.

 

i'll have a look at the AlbD3, could be ai parameters, probably in a couple of days

[+peter01 2]

Tailspin, looked at Alb D3, glad you brought this up, as it only required a few tweaks to make far more effective.

 

importantly thanks again to the Ateam and Charles for allowing me to mod their FMs, and this is only some minor changes to Charles original and very good Alb D3 FM.

 

Basically, beefed up, feels pretty much like original perhaps tighter, AI is extremelly good - well behaved, hardly any looping/stalling if at all, very capable and aggressive as AI - as you'd expect of an Alb D3 :yes:

 

i'll include it in uploads section when ready to upload the others as it works well with them, but in interim, heres a text file.

 

AlbatrosD3_DATA.txt

[+peter01 2]

Decided to give an update on what I'm doing, as its still a few weeks away before complete.

 

It is a lot of work, like a fulltime job, luckily I only need 3 or 4 hours sleep a night, and have become very good at FMs as well as understanding how the game works.

 

And its very complex too. Nearly gave up a couple of times out of frustration - its not so much the FMs, its the consistency, and if you like, the game experience. This is tricky, because of how the game works.

 

I guess I'm driven mainly by making this the game I always wanted or thought it could be. Of course there are so many other things that TK and the community can do - from terrains, more models (but we are very spoilt here even now), sounds, skins, more realism, damage modelling, effects, campaigns and missions, ground activity, immersion type of improvements etc but that is happening, and will come over time. So the FMs are only one thing - but to me very important.

 

I'm going to call this version of the FMs EWS Version 1.0 - for "Early War Set", partly because I have so many different versions of FMs out there, but mainly because these definitely go together as a set.

 

It does sound grandiose, I know, and there will be some criticism.

 

But - its looking very very good, and most importantly, without a doubt, would not be possible unless one person or a team working together spent an awful lot of time on it. So again, very grateful to the modellers for allowing me to do the FMs or alternative FMs.

 

So I'm going to do a few posts over the next few weeks on what I'm doing and some of the challenges, its impossible to leave for one post - far too complicated. It will give me an incentive to continue (it does take some encouragement), as well as explaining more of the game so that perhaps others can follow and be aware of some of the issues. Also so you guys can comment etc.

 

First post on this follows - there will be more!!!! Warts and all....

[Guest Charles]

Looking forward to it!

 

For those who haven't already got them, I highly reccomend Peter01's FMs for FE.

The DH.2 FM, for example, is a significant improvement on the release version of that FM. Maybe the patch made changes to the FE flight engine, or maybe the original FM was just poor, but Peter01's current version, which you can find in a thread here somewhere, is better, in my view.

[+peter01 2]

Well I started to play the game several weeks ago because all the FMs I was doing were pretty well done. Campaigns, missions, as a player. not a FM'er.

 

I was dissapointed to be honest. For many reasons, not evident at first. Slowly dawned on me, but how to fix took even longer - not to do so much, but how to do it. Thats what I've been doing the past month or two.

 

First disappointment/difficulty - the early planes are too sprightly!!! The whole dogfight experience seemed too frantic. The AI rolling and turning too quickly etc. And the early planes are too good compared to the later ones - all my fault of course, they are my FMs, but .....

 

Easily fixed? Well, no, its is a very difficult problem - it cannot be fixed by doing new FMs. It relates to the game engine mainly: AI aggressiveness, climb, how the AI uses climb in the game, Hard versus Normal FM, the period extending from very incapable warplanes (morane H) to very good (Alb D3) and playability. I did say it was complex right! And the more I learnt, the harder it became....hence nearly giving up. But found ways of adressing most of this - by a whole combination of minor changes, and its now really very good to me.

 

I can't reduce climb - tried this, and it just isn't a game at all, the player just struggles in Hard FM to climb, dogfights aren't interesting, you just spiral down where of course the AI gives up near the ground (game design), you can't do anything except try to outturn the AI. Realsitic maybe, but boring. Also even the AI starts to struggle not crashing into ground.

 

More importantly on climb, reducing say by 10%, still doesn't mean that there aren't better then later planes. Why, and how resolved???? A later post.

 

So i left climb largely as it was, with some minor reductions to some planes, as well as general ones for all. Altitude performance drops off more for early planes - so when they meet later ones, usually higher up, they are comparatively disadvantaged. Also, as AI climbs very well now (another post), but player is constrained by stalls and other things for early planes in Hard FM (also another post - you must fly in Hard FM for consistency at least!), the AI isn't. So reduced the performance of AI planes to climb at low speeds - below 40-50mph, where the AI can climb well but player can't. This was ONLY possible because the AI is now very very good - another post as well!!! Previously I went out of my way to make the AI as tough as possible. I find now I'm doing the converse, they are too good!!

 

Ok, thats climb.

 

Roll. Too good of course. But really when you reduce the planes are not good to fly. I have mentioned in previous posts that I thought the roll on all planes was too good including TKs. The reason is not historical accuracy really, nor player or AI capability except say Camel a few others, they just "feel" far better that way. It has little to do with performance, more to do with enjoyability.

 

Happily there is a decent and very good solution for the early period. I used the AI parameters to reduce the AI rolling like Zeros - again posible because the AI are far better generally. And have spent lots of time on keeping roll down for player, whilst still making planes enjoyable to fly - took some lateral thinking on wing warping!! The Morane H and L are good examples. Roll is about the same, but done differently so they "feel" good - the MSL version 1.0 iwas always my favourite but roll was too good, hence, reduced in later versions. This version slows it down to latest, but it "feels" even better than original to me. The MSH is probably the best - great improvement.

 

Turn/pitch. All reduced somewhat. Reducing anymore for some results in the AI crashing into the ground when low - not enough pitch to avoid and pull up in time. And to be honest, the Eindeckker E3 went out with a mistake, that made it much better then they were designed by me to be on turn. Sorry. The mistake was repeated in the other Eindeckkers to keep consistent until fixed for all.

 

Just a note on this tho - to make the FMs very different to later planes which have smooth turn/pitch etc, they are currently and remain somewhat unstable/jerky on pitch. I think this works well for feeling of early planes, makes them different to later ones. BUT in Normal Mode this is too pronounced - and as turn/pitch is far greater in Normal Mode than Hard, they turn too good in dogfights as well. Sooo, please play Hard!

 

Finally, to decrease agility of AI early planes, reduced the speed they throttle up and down - probably more reaslistic now (for a change!!), and improves tyhe overall dogfight experience as well whislt not disadvantaging the AI much. Again, only possible because the AI are very good now.

 

The result is far far more pleasing to me - both the feel of the planes and the dogfight experience. The result from a game play point of view is that they also fit better with latter planes (more on this later).

 

As you imagine this took a lot of tweaking, just as importantly and time consuming, testing - eg, what happens if you reduce altitude effectiveness when AI are high - do they fall out of the sky!

 

Also as you can see - there is a lot in TKs game and FMs. Its just a matter of finding and applying some of these things as well taking a quite different approach to TKs and making it a lot harder.

 

Comments welcome - i know it can seem intimidating commenting on what someone has spent a lot of time on, but really I won't bite (usually).

 

Cheers

Edited July 11, 2007 by peter01

[JediMaster 451]

My only comment--I'm jealous you can afford to devote the time to this! My time doesn't seem my own.

[don246 65]

Albatross D3 FM works fine with me another gem to fly needed the FM sorted out. Many Thanks

[+peter01 2]

Thanks for comments Don.

 

On another note, the service start date as someone pointed out (thankyou!) to me is incorrect on this mod - its 01/1916 instead of 01/1917. Easily changed by you, so I'll leave it for this one available here.

 

Sorry, but for testing purposes I set the date for all planes from 1916 - saves me having to redo numerous test missions with different dates. So thanks again for pointing it out - I'll need to check the that release version FMs are all scrubbed up.

 

BTW, this reminds me of another minor point I've been musing about and has been discussed on forum before - service end dates and availability. Seems if you set availability to COMMON and the end date for example for Alb D3 is to end of war (it was available then tho limited), it will be common for that entire period. Thinking about putting end dates that say really reflect when it was "reasonably" common, say in this case near end 1917.

 

My thinking is that sometimes its a bit of a game thing too, eg, Morane L. Thinking of setting this to common to mid 1916, tho it was relatively common maybe only in 1915 period. Why? Well, if your flying German say E3 in a campaign or missions you'll be meeting mainly Fe2Bs and Dh3s - tough times indeed, and tyhe E3 is the best German plane for a good 6 months!!! So having Moranes adds to variety and reduces the difficulty say in a game.

 

Does this have other implications? Any suggestions?

Edited July 12, 2007 by peter01

[+Tailspin 3]

"Well, if your flying German say E3 in a campaign or missions you'll be meeting mainly Fe2Bs and Dh3s - tough times indeed, and tyhe E3 is the best German plane for a good 6 months!!!"

 

 

 

Hmmm...I have to say "Thats the way the cookie crumbles." There were periods where both sides enjoyed air superiority from the beginning to nearly mid 1917. IMHO that is just as interesting to gameplay as trying to maintain a balance. Fair dose of reality AFAIAC and it surely cuts both ways.

[+peter01 2]

Mmmm, I do know what you mean, but, for discussion purposes...

 

The E3 was successful. Its kill/loss ratio was very good, its really what made its reputation. And why the germans continued with an obsolete design perhaps so long (as well as other better planes not available).

 

So, yes, the Fe2B and Dh2 were superior (the Fe2B I'm not so sure about, I think it really was how it was used, though my FM is because you can't force the AI to adopt Lufberry tactics!), but there were easy targets for the E3. Perhaps mainly armed and even unarmed 2 seaters? Possibly less capable fighters that we don't have in the game yet (Martinsyde is though)?

 

And of course the MSL and MSH were around. As you can't set availablity to common for one period, rare for another, which would be more realistic, the choice is as I see it not one of realism, more of trying to "simulate" reality if you like.

 

Not sure that makes a lotta sense, and is partly why I am interested in different views.

 

 

PS someone asked me why I upload text files not data ini files on threads. Its a good question cos not everyone knows of course that you can't load data.inis on forum - for security reasons presumably. So you can use the text file - just open in Notepad, save in correct folder as a "ini" file by overwriting the current one. Just back up your original thats all. Easy as that.

 

Have to say haven't tried zip files - i should, that may be a better way. everyone is used to zip files.

Edited July 12, 2007 by peter01

[+peter01 2]

Given my rantings about the aircraftobject.ini, thought it was a good time to post about the second reason why I was dissappointed with the game and my FMs when I started playing it, and what has caused some delays in finalising them - all to do with consistency and the dogfight experience. And fundamentally the whole problem arose because of the time span covered, and the vast difference in capability - its not an issue for the latter mid 1917-18 period so much, the planes were more comparable.

 

Yep, the AI.....I stared to use the AI parameters to make them more effective, something I hadn't done before...mainly because I didn't want a few planes inconsistent with the rest available and also as my focus was getting the FM right anyway...the AI parameters just add to that aspect.

 

But my problem was they were too good!!! I couldn't win! And its not like I'm a dud pilot.

 

I'm certain many of you are scratching their heads over the fact I said earlier that climb for the early planes was a problem (probably scratching your heads over everything I'm posting ). Well, all the AI climb like monkeys now.

 

I had always assumed this was the AI's biggest weakness - and very little could be done about it. So I should have been happy, but wasn't. The reason, all my FMs were built on the fact that the AI as a whole was woeful in climbing, and as I found out I was between a rock and a hard place.....on the one hand couldn't reduce climb for earlier planes (explained I hope in other post), on the other say the Albs couldn't climb anymore or they would be better than later planes like Se5a, and I wanted that consistency.

 

So why are they good climbers (have to pose these rhetorical questions, nobody seems to ask )

 

Well a couple of AI parameters tell the AI to get aggressive, they stop acting like there suffering from hangovers and get down to business. They go into a "gun attack mode" - and they are constantly trying to outfox and outfly you. Its good, its great, you have a real dogfight on your hands. But when in this mode, they use climb extremely well.

 

The AI fly in Normal Mode. In normal mode I'd say the climb is about 20-30% better than Hard - mine are developed for Hard. Thats a huge difference. And bye the bye, if you find the AI easy and are flying in Normal thats a reason - they still don't climb as well as the player but you will always be able to outclimb comparable planes. But in Hard the advantage is with the AI, IF they are in "gun attack mode" - which mine are most of the time now.

 

So, problem: couldn't outclimb the Dh2 in Alb D3!!!! The Dh2 has got to be at least as good as E3, so can't reduce climb there (the rock and the hard place, reduce E3 then need to reduce earlier planes) but that 20 - 30 % advantage was now all with the AI.

 

If you do the math you can see the problem of climb seemed insurmountable - start with MSH, E1 as player should outclimb, hence make it 30% better climb to outclimb the MSH AI, E3 even better, then say late 1916 planes even better etc etc....so it goes to the Albs. Before you know it, your making quick trips to the moon.

 

Well there are solutions of course, the game TK has designed really is very good. What I did very briefly was to reduce stall speeds for later planes which i had been pushing to 40 mph to about 30 mph for many (player climbs better as a result), applied some of the other things I mentioned earlier on early planes to later planes, and introduced a lot of rudder - I had in past been reluctant to do this because it gave the player a distinct advantage... now they need it to even it up with a very aggressive AI. So its good in every way, cos rudder is good fun and realistic.

 

But the big thing is the stall parameter in the FM. It doesn't mean much other than to tell the AI when to level out because it will stall.....whether that is the case or not is immaterial.

 

Example: dh2 should climb roughly as well as E3 as AI. And vice versa. Set AI stalls so this happens as expected and get an interesting dogfight. But the time involved in consistency is in making sure that the Dh2 can climb with say E3, but will not outclimb Albs as AI....low stall for fighting the E3 as AI, high with Albs.....the answer is somewhere in between. But its got to be consistent with all the other planes too!!!

 

And so it goes testing and setting parameters with all the planes so you get the result you think is right - and its very subjective. Its designing the game experience - no longer just FMs as such. And like I said earlier consistency just wouldn't happen unless someone or a team did all this. The good thing tho is its easily changed by anyone...just change the stall parameters up or down a bit.

 

Anyway, to cut a long story short.....its good, just some work redoing things. Its good because its better to control good climb rather than being in a situation where they won't climb competitively. maybe another reason to play hard mode :yes: ?

 

And....the AI are very very good. As tough as you could possibly want....a different game entirely.

 

Ahhh, back to work...posting is easier than doing the FMs.

Edited July 12, 2007 by peter01

[+Tailspin 3]

Mmmm, I do know what you mean, but, for discussion purposes...

 

The E3 was successful. Its kill/loss ratio was very good, its really what made its reputation. And why the germans continued with an obsolete design perhaps so long (as well as other better planes not available).

 

So, yes, the Fe2B and Dh2 were superior (the Fe2B I'm not so sure about, I think it really was how it was used, though my FM is because you can't force the AI to adopt Lufberry tactics!), but there were easy targets for the E3. Perhaps mainly armed and even unarmed 2 seaters? Possibly less capable fighters that we don't have in the game yet (Martinsyde is though)?

 

And of course the MSL and MSH were around. As you can't set availablity to common for one period, rare for another, which would be more realistic, the choice is as I see it not one of realism, more of trying to "simulate" reality if you like.

 

Not sure that makes a lotta sense, and is partly why I am interested in different views.

 

PS someone asked me why I upload text files not data ini files on threads. Its a good question cos not everyone knows of course that you can't load data.inis on forum - for security reasons presumably. So you can use the text file - just open in Notepad, save in correct folder as a "ini" file by overwriting the current one. Just back up your original thats all. Easy as that.

 

Have to say haven't tried zip files - i should, that may be a better way. everyone is used to zip files.

 

I think you have touched on one of the problems with the sim and the early (1914-15) period of the war. There were far more two seat observer types being employed for many different purposes and far less single seat "fighter" types in the air. We need more early two seaters. In the meantime we probably should set the BE2c up to do more fighter type missions like offensive and defensive patrols as it was a very common aircraft on the front early on. That would help provide the Fokker E series with the opponents it really earned its reputation against. Because, and I think history is pretty clear on this, when the Neuport 11, DH-2, and even the FE2b hit the skies, the Fokker E was quickly rendered obsolete. I just don't think the EIII was that good when you get past the parasols and slow lumbering two seat observation planes.

[+peter01 2]

Spent the w/e finalising consistency and playing the game to see if everything is okay, so nearing completion. Still have to do final checks - takeoffs, formation flying, some stalls, clean up files - hence another week or two - as there are about 30 FMs, from MSH to Brisfit.

 

But while its fresh in my mind thought I'd post about the game experience.

 

Firstly, all the planes feel good (spent some time on this aspect), as good as any around, and I think (I would of course!) a whole lot better than many. Not talking about realism, quirks etc, been thru all that - but in terms of say wanting to fly the planes, because they feel good to fly. And other than the obvious similarity of some plane variations (Fokkers E1s and 2s are similar, same for E3s, then Alb D2s), they all feel different. The earlier period is also a lot different then the later period. And many planes have a lot more feel if you like - they retain more feel in dogfights, especially the wing warpers - in a gentle way!

 

Naturally its all a matter of taste, and things would be different for different joysticks and sensitivity settings. But, briefly, the early planes are all redone, simialr to before just lots better I think. The Pfalz EIV and V are quite different, and different to Eindeckkers and other Pfalzes - the PfalzEIV is one I fly quite often now. Some of Borts are just great - Albs, FokkerDs (finally nailed these!), the Martinsyde my personal favourite (along with Tripe and MSH). All the Ateams are good - did these later when I had learnt a lot more about FMs, or more precisely, what effects the AI and what doesn't! I like the Fe2B especially partly cos I had so much trouble with it, but because its a real hoot in a dogfight with the gunner, as well as nice to fly.

 

And for the player, stalls are lowish (30mph or so) with some exceptions - early period and one or two others that would be too good with such low stalls. And all have improved rudder, less so for early, but some later ones from Dh2, Martinsyde and Fe2b onwards have improved/good to very good rudder.

 

In terms of dogfights, well its a lot different I think. The AI are far far better, they are very good (on Hard FM ONLY, another final post), and it is indeed a consistent experience. EG, Player in Dh2 will find early Pfalzes and E1 quite easy (but AI still put up a fight), later Pfalzes and E3s somewhat harder - quite hard at times, then with Halbs and Albs a real real challenge, finally against Alb D3 nigh impossible. Importantly, the Dh2 as AI will be same against the player in the German planes (this just doesn't happen, BTW, its often a lot of work alone), just the converse of course - eg, very hard in E3, easy for Alb D3 against AI Dh2.

 

The Dh2 was the biggest challenge, it covered the entire period, and had to go from domination to obsolescence. To be honest, if I knew beforehand how hard it was going to be trying to achieve consistency over a period like mid 1915 - mid 1917, I wouldn't have done this. Just would have stuck to say 1915, or 1916, not both. Also pleased to say that the later 1916/ early 1917 planes still fit with the 1917 planes such as the Se5a and SpadXIII.

 

Have also tried to get it consistent in difficulty. The player will find it a real dogfight flying against a "regular" AI in a comparable plane - regulars would be the most common skill level you would encounter. It can be quite challenging - you'd spend as much time dodging the AI as shooting them down, and the odds are very roughly even who wins. I had to tone it down in the last few weeks, it had become too hard, and would be interested what others find. The exception is the early period - its even harder, or at least you need to be patient! Basically because the player has generally an advantage over the AI in "using" climb effectively in this game, and there's less ability to outclimb with early planes. Of course, this all varies with your skill level, knowing both your plane and the enemy's planes capability (it gets easier once you fly the same plane for a while) and the skill levels you encounter - you'd be lucky to win against an "Ace" even in sometimes a better plane, and you'll be pleased to encounter the odd novice or so in a campaign.

 

As said before too, the early early war dogfight experience has been slowed down. Seems good to me, quite leisurely in a way, and you need patience and have to wait for an opening to get an advantage. Or this is at least how it seems to me.

 

Finally, never once had an AI issue on the w/e - stalling, looping, crashing, getting stuck. The AI planes are very robust.

 

So, looking good, I think.

 

Cheers

Edited July 16, 2007 by peter01

[+peter01 2]

Spent more time on the FMs on w/e so an update.... honestly, could hardly wait to post this... interesting new developments, but problems too.

 

I did find some issues with formations due to some ai parameters I changed, and took some time to identify...they are quite tricky...but have solved all but one remaining annoyance (plus another more interesting one..see below). If I can't resolve this issue by end of this week or so I'll upload anyway, its not major to me at all, just a nuisance...but I'll probably fix it if I look hard enough. Actually thats whats its been like, find an issue, one at a time, fix one at a time, next one pops up... it does seem endless.

 

But, the reason I was very keen to post.....

 

I was concerned my Pup was too good (I worry about everything, tripe is even better). One month ago I could reasonably easily beat all the others up to AlbD3 in 1:1s in the pup. Thats okay I guess, but a challenge is good right?

 

Well flew it against the AlbD3 on w/e in 1:1 and couldn't win. Flew against Albd2 same, and albd1, and fokkerd3L, Halbs - all the same - shot down each and every time. Then in deseperation, the Fokker D3 and Fokker D2. I beat the last two after about a 15min-30 minute dogfight each, but it was touch and go. This is with "regular" pilots. And the Pup is pretty good.

 

Of course nothing in the basic FMs has changed, just ai parameters. Do they have an advantage? Yes some do, they are AI, they need some sort of advantage. But mainly they all just fly the planes far far better now, and it makes a huge difference.

 

So thats my current problem. When i did most of the FMs a few months back I did what I could to balance them - AI flies the plane as well as player. unfortunately this was not entirely satisfactory, especially in climb where the advantage is with the player, so ai with good climb were not very effective. Not anymore, they use climb very well.

 

Now they are sort of unbalanced again...but very much to the AI's advantage!!!

 

I'll rebalance this disparity somewhat, but not entirely, for a few reasons. I will need to redo once TK puts out his update - I'm sure there will be changes. I'm a little sick of "balancing" - though its easily "fixed", it takes a lot of time testing, and i'll refine it over time playing the game (hopefully some of you will provide feedback too please). And of course, for others to see what actually can be done with the AI - though what you will get is a toned down version, simply because it is currently too hard.

 

So, whether you like my FMs or not, whether your interested in my idea of "consistency" or not, if your interested in seeing very good AI in FE (to be honest, I did not think it was possible, even just a few weeks ago) , make sure you try them out. Believe me, I've played combat flight sims for many years - and these are as tough as it gets....the dogfight experience is completely transformed.

Edited July 23, 2007 by peter01

[ShrikeHawk 384]

Thanks much for all the work you're putting into this, Peter. FMs are very challenging. I did a lot of that

in CFS2. It kept me busy for many many hours, hehehe. I'm looking forward to trying yours out.

 

I've already modded my aircraftobject.ini based on an earlier post from you. Carefully avoiding the

params you said were pretty tricky. I've been getting some real fights on my hands since then!

Thanks for passing on the tips.

 

I've been working on the Se.5a myself. Trying to get this thing to just...land! It hardly sinks at all or

slows down even with no power! It's the only plane that does this that I can see. I've been

poking around the _data.ini file trying to find that magical param that gives the Se.5 it's anti-grav,

frictionless feature, hehehe. I'll find it sooner or later.