What do you think?

[+peter01 2]

Into late war now finally, and its good - different dogfight experience with more ZnB, and far more frantic.

 

Planes I have done are also different - not like monos I did (jaunty, unstable), german 1916 (simple but business like), allied 1916 planes (simple but more sophisticated due to ailerons etc). So the feel varies over time - I like this from a game experience POV.

 

Zip includes AlbDva, Fokker D7s, Spad13, Se5a. Some are new FMs, some are major or minor mods to TKs. AI are superb. Done for Hard Mode of course.

 

Though they seem fine consider them beta, haven't tested them completely nor completed stalls as carefully as I would like - I was going to wait for TK to release his new addon, but it seems to be taking forever, so thought I'd share them as is with those interested.

 

Let me know what you think of them, or any issues (I might have more!), and if interest I'll make them available in the downloads section, with others maybe.

 

Cheers

 

Alternative_FMs_for_TKs_Fighters.zip

Edited August 14, 2007 by peter01

[Firecage 1]

I will try them out as soon as I get soem free time. Been on a 60+ work week lately so I haven't had the free time to do alot during the week. This will be nice to have an over all balance to all the planes. Great job !

[Nicholas Bell 117]

Thanks, Peter! I hope to be able to give them a spin later this week. You've done some great work on the other planes!

 

Any chance you might be willing to post some definitions and effects of the various AI parameters so we can learn from your experience?

[ShrikeHawk 384]

Fabulous Peter!

 

I've been looking forward to these. I was fiddling with the SPAD 13 just last night.

Then, I really just wanted to make some kills without fighting my own aircraft to

do it.

 

Now I can just pop your FM in and go out with guns blazing!

 

Thanks!

 

ShrikeHawk

[+Tailspin 3]

First...love the Fokker DVIIs and DVa. The DVII is finally the stable, easy to fly fighter it is supposed to be.

 

However, IMHO the roll rate on the SPAD XIII is way too high. The SPAD was renowned for its speed, durability, climb, and (especially) dive capabilities but it was not considered very maneuverable. Also not easy to fly because of nasty stall/spin characteristics. The SPAD was a true BnZ fighter. I think maybe the SE5a is a bit overdone in the roll too.

 

Thanks peter, much appreciated.

 

ps...Needless to add I think the stock roll rate for the SPAD is a bit much too.

[+peter01 2]

Hi Nicholas, I will, but not quite yet.

 

I am keen to share, I think this is very good for the game and for everybody, thats not my reluctance. More that things are likely to change and it will take some effort for me to do properly - it is very tricky/dangerous changing the ai parameters, so it does require a detailed explanation.

 

Just a few things.

 

You can indeed get very good AI. As good as you could want really. But only in that they do what they can do far more effectively - roll, turn, climb, attack, aggression other things like force an ai plane to be a ZnB'er in dogfights or even cunning (I kid you not). But you can't make them "smarter", or do things they are not programmed to do - eg, attacking two seaters differently, doing Immelmanns lol.

 

And all my FMs are WIP, largely because I believe TK will change AI parameters (and stall behavior), so I'd rather wait after his new release before explaining it all - the ai parameters could work differently (actually I think this is why some planes had problems after patches, there were changes) and could be added to as well.

 

And its complex.

 

You can't plug in any set (including mine) into any plane - the planes will be worse as AI, even though you may think you are improving them. Actually some will be an absolute disaster, and it may not be obvious at first. Hence my reluctance to say even just a bit.

 

The FM has to be built robustly (most of TKs are BTW), and then the FM tweaked for the AI parameters or vice versa. Of course if you tested the changes you made to other peoples FMs you can improve them, but you need to test for all skill levels (aircraftobject.ini) as this modifies the ai behavior, and formation flying and takeoffs - some ai parameters (not the obvious formation type ones alone) effect this to the extent they will crash into one another or not takeoff. This "minor problem" caused me a month of rework. And of course you need to know exactly what cause and effect is - eg, pitch on roll is I think, 0.023 as default, and should be more for some planes or far far less for others to make the AI well behaved and far more effective - but how do you know? And do you really want to make say an Dh2 AI climb nearly as well as you in an Albatros - you can tho. Well, those sorts of things are what require a full explanation.

 

I don't think the vast majoriy of people want to do these types of things themselves, and why should they. Those that are doing FMs I know are looking at what I have done and thats good, and working it out anyway - simply because they do that testing. So my target audience actually will be I guess budding FM'ers.

 

Not trying to "get out" of explaining these parameters, just, really, they have all sorts of consequences. There isn't a magic set of numbers for all planes - its up to people to find the best set for that plane. The FM'ers, I hope, so its just plug 'an play if you like for everyone else, but its been neglected by everybody to date including TK, so I do understand the frustration. I still don't know to be honest why TK didn't do more with these parameters for his own planes - as is, they are hardly challenging AI.

 

But I will post what i know further down the track. Its likely going to be a very long post.

[JediMaster 451]

Which no doubt should be made into a sticky, I think!

[Bandy 3]

Peter, the original FE aircraft are brand new airplanes with these FMs!!! They have so much character now, and they force you into managing the throttle, which I found was not the case previously. I had a few hours last night and flew them in the stock "warm-up" FE missions which I am most familiar with: ie: 1 vs 2, 2 vs 2. I believe at least one of the opponent AI pilots is at least a veteran in these missions, the other green or worse, judging by their behaviour...

 

The SPAD XIII: one word -- power! It climbs like a monkey, but I did not see any nasty stall/spin traits. Then again, I was having so much fun (all the AI's are much improved, but see below) that I really wasn't trying to make a mistake either.

 

However, I find that the AI SPAD can be easily suckered into a less than advantageous fight given the SPAD's strengths of speed and climb. Since you mention that you can "force an ai plane to be a ZnB'er in dogfights" maybe this aspect needs to be worked on. Then again, perhaps it was because I was flying the DVIIF against them (an AC that has everything), that I could shoot SPADs down almost at will.

 

I know the SE5 had a heavy nose with the engine and radiator so far forward, but I'm finding the positive elevator/pitch response to be very frustrating, and I know it will take a toll in wear'n'tear on my joystick in the end. It is deadly in dives but throttling back ameliorates this nasty behaviour somewhat. That said, when flying against them, the AI SE5's didn't seem to have a problem...

 

The DVA is a much improved opponent, though I have not flown it so no comment there.

 

The AI is now showing signs of, dare I repeat your verbiage, "cunning"??? I was locked into a vertical jousting match that lasted 18 nail-biting minutes (by game clock) of flipping defense/offense, and at one point I came out of a stall inverted to see the AI approaching me similarly inverted and giving me both barrels. Unexpected behaviour, and no single pattern was repeated that I could see -- then again, this is a limited sampling of about a half dozen reflys each mission. I couldn't easily get to sleep after that session...

 

For beta versions, they are very nice. Can't wait to see them polished!

 

PS: as far as "the vast majoriy of people [not] wanting to do these types of things themselves" I would agree, I know I can't, but reading the explanations and understanding how these things work and interact provides a window into the "guts" that makes the game that much more enjoyable, for me at least...

Edited August 15, 2007 by B Bandy RFC

[Nicholas Bell 117]

Peter,

 

I fully understand and appreciate where you are coming from. Please don't crash and burn on us all before you get around to it though! A break may be in order given your description of how much time you've spent on this. While I think it wonderful you are doing the hard work to so greatly enhance this sim, I also don't want you to burn out and drop out.

 

Thanks again - your talent and time spent are appreciated!

[+peter01 2]

Nicholas, hope i didn't seem too "stressed out" replying about the AI, didn't mean to. Checked some of your posts before replying so I knew you interest was genuine, and was trying to explain. But I do get carried away with anything to do with changing AI stuff or even simple things in the FM - it seems so easy, the game is built for modding, but it usually results in making things worse.

 

i'm not burnt out, but thanks for your comments. The EWS stuff was indeed very very hard - the wide period covering such different planes and different performance, trying to make them feel different to later planes (therefore doing them completely different to what others have done, even doing 1916 planes a lot different to 1915 ones), learning and redoing things whislt understanding the AI, so many planes, yadda yadda. It was hard, a lot of work. Looking back, really don't even know how I did it. But its done, and the FMs can be improved (FMs can always be improved I think), but thats pretty easy. Doing the late ones like this is really very easy in comparison - consistency is more there, there are many good ones so its often more tweaking then redoing from scratch. I am not spending all that much time now. Just a few hours here and there. But again, thanks for your concern.

 

Thanks Tailspin and Bandy for trying them out and posting - i do appreciate that most of all, and you are both pretty spot on about it.

 

i do think they are very nice. And better than stock by quite a margin - I'm biased of course. But credit where credit is due, most are based on TKs work (Alb is completely different), though a lot of rework especially Se5a and Fokker Ds. TK does some very fine FMs, just how he puts it together is not how I like myself, maybe others feel that way too? I like far more feel, less IMO excessive yawing, some more stability, far better AI. And with some planes incorporating or improving well known attributes - FokkerDs for example are a joy and easy to fly, as well as more capable, Spad and se5a have better dive capability.

 

So what i have done is really "uncovered" the hidden potential. the Fokker ds are a very good example - hiddden in TKs stock Fokker D7 FM was IMO a truly great plane just waiting to come out. I was very surprised about this too. Didn't like the stock much at all - was ready to redo these completely from scratch, but after some modding started to realise they were indeed very good. As I said earlier, you can always improve on FMs.

 

Haven't finished stalls yet - TK will change this aspect in his update. I don't want to do now, then redo later. Also, still trying to decide what to do with that - higher, yes but how high and how nasty. Maybe even two versions? As I said, I have been playing/flying these planes for a few weeks, and wasn't going to release them yet, but decided it was a lot of fun, why not make them available to the community, as is, in the interim. I reckon the stall stuff could be the icing on the cake - it will make the planes or maybe more accurately "the experience" a lot better - but I don't want to get hopes up too much, accurate stall behavior maybe impossible or just very hard to do. But it can be better.

 

Tailspin, I will reduce roll on SpadXIII. Changed it, tried it, and its better. It does force the player to use BnZ. AI isn't affected.

 

Bandy, glad you gave then a good go and posted your experiences. i did changes to make the Se5a and Spad ZnB'ers. They both climb very well (this was there originally, tho improved a bit for Spad), and improved the dive a lot for both especially for Spad - not the slow glide down, but the real vertical dive. What you said about the Se5a is correct - it tightens up in a dive (more so than Spad, on purpose). The idea, whether it works or not, was that in a dogfight the player flying a Spad should use dive and climb, and it should be effective (it is fun too - and reducing roll as tailspin suggested encourages this), whilst with Se5a the player should use dive for spped only (it picks up quickly), but the dive in itself doesn't give you the edge, its harder to pull up from. Thats a difference between the two, if it makes sense.

 

Not sure why the SpadXIII doesn't seem that effective as an AI to you. Will look at it, but isn't the case for me, so are you using a standard Aircraftobject.ini? Flying in Hard? It is true the D7F is very effective (its a different/bit better than D7, but D7 is great flying against all late/good allied planes - you win, but work for it!), it could be that the skill level is low (i have optimised for regular skill level - you have to make a choice in the design), and Ace and Veteran are not as good strangely enough as Regular.

 

The DVA is a much improved opponent

 

hehe, now thats an understatement. Its far better!! and a really really good opponent for its capability, perhaps overdone as an AI. If not, either you are indeed a far better pilot than me, or there is something different in your game to mine.

 

I was having so much fun (all the AI's are much improved, but see below)

 

Good, I was too, very much - its the reason i released them now. I really really am now having heaps of fun in the Late war period (you will have a bit more too when i release the next lot) - and haven't even flown my beloved MSH/Ls for some time.

Edited August 16, 2007 by peter01

[FalconC45 162]

Peter,

 

Good job on these FMs. Normally I fly the FM on normal but I hafta say that your FMs are really good. I got a weird problem on the SPAD. I take off from the runway and its leaning on its right wing. Sometimes though it will "kiss the ground" before the nose comes up. I thought at first I was using the throttle too fast but it acts the same way when I used the throttle slowly.

 

I thought you need to know this :)

[+Tailspin 3]

Hi Falcon. Quick remedy until things get sorted out. Hit A (autopilot) right when the screen comes up. This keeps down the nose stands. As soon as you get a good takeoff roll going you can go back to manual.

[Bandy 3]

[RE: DVA] hehe, now thats an understatement. Its far better!! and a really really good opponent for its capability, perhaps overdone as an AI. If not, either you are indeed a far better pilot than me, or there is something different in your game to mine.

You ain't whistling "Dixie" Peter!!! I'm amazed at what the DVA can do, and all without a pilot!!! I'm just pulling your leg here of course, but it appears at least in my download of your FM that the code for the DVA pilot is not there or corrupt, and I can flip back and forth between the stock FM to replicate the missing pilot... Anyone else notice this??? Or is it a corrupt download???

 

RE: game differences, as per your advice in another thread, I'm using a stock Aircraftdata.ini, with only max/min cannon ranges and cannon angles changed. However, I am lucky enough to have a wife who purchased TrackIR4 for me last Christmas; it makes a really big difference if you are using a hat button or keyboard for changing views...

 

Missing DVA pilot with your FM, or is he just ducking??? That's me in the SPAD BTW:

 

And with stock FE FM:

Edited August 16, 2007 by B Bandy RFC

[+Tailspin 3]

BBandy. Open up the data.ini and have a look at the Fuselage] section. SystemName[006]=Pilot is commented out. Try removing the slashes. I haven't tried it to see if this is the prob, so I could be wrong. I have a pilot when I chose to fly the plane. Haven't run across the AI DVa yet so...

 

 

 

 

SystemName[001]=InternalGun1

SystemName[002]=InternalGun2

SystemName[003]=LeftMainGear

SystemName[004]=RightMainGear

SystemName[005]=FuselageFuelTank

//SystemName[006]=Pilot

SystemName[006]=BombCompartment

DetachNode[001]=Gun Left

DetachNode[002]=Gun Right

[+peter01 2]

Just quickly, bit of a rush.

 

Bandy, problem with pilot is becaused I used Gambit's german pilot version for my own game.

 

3 choices:

 

1) Replace line in alb data ini

 

PilotModelName=WWIGERPILOT

 

with

 

PilotModelName=WWIpilot

 

2) d/l gambit's pilot

 

 

3) wait till I upload to CombatAce, fixing this and some other things.

 

 

Tailspin, changing that entry won't help. The pilot is commented out here but added elsewhere - you can do these things many different ways. But thanks for helping.

 

I did a quick check of the other german planes, they are okay.

Edited August 16, 2007 by peter01

[+peter01 2]

Thanks Falcon for posting. I do try to make sure that you can takeoff in all planes, but.....I guess I like them a little tricky, and personally am just keen on getting up in the air and into action, so don't worry to much if some are a little difficult. And of course what makes the plane tricky on takeoff, adds to the character of the plane when flying - the most important thing to me. But your post made me realise thats probably not right - most people would like to takeoff without fighting the plane to do so. I will look at Spad, and probably will change my way of looking at this, so thanks for feedback, appreciated. Like everyone, I need to be quizzed or have things bought to my attention (as you did nicely), to see really if my approach is the best, this is a good example where I can say i have been probably wrong.

 

Bandy, tried Spad and Se5a as player and AI. Your post was very accurate.

 

The Se5a does pick up speed very quickly in a dive, and yes as you stated you do need to use the throttle when flying against more nimble planes (as it is a decent dogfighter too - the danger is of course is that its not the best, so if you slow down it can become dangerous - I got shot down by a pfalz!! how embarrassing.), though against faster better climbers ZnB is the best approach. However it could be overdone - not sure whether i should tone this down, cos on the other hand it does make it different to fly to any other plane and requires different tactics for different opponents. If anyone has any thoughts, let me know, otherwise I'll leave it and then over time probably decide what works best for me, hopefully then you too.

 

Re Spad as AI. Its interesting. I'd say that yes some of the time it does do some less than optimal dogfight maneouvers as you said, yet other times seems extremely effective. I'd guess too that they are "more stupid" if Ace or vetran - because testing last night I flew with the standard Aircraftobject.ini, for my own game in this period I use one where the veterans and aces are actually regulars - they are better without a doubt. And also seems to be based on the type of opponent. It does indeed have most trouble with the more capable opponents - Fokker D7s that both turn and climb pretty well. I will look at it, could be changes to things in the FM itself that affect the AI as well as the AI parameters. If former I'll leave it for now. Don't want to spend too much time on the FMs now until TKs new release - things could be quite different.

 

I'm glad you are basically using the standard stuff, Since I know your interested in these things, just thought I let you know another thing I found interesting. And also shows how you do need to be careful.

 

As the AI are very good now, I decided to change the gun effectiveness, so they are less like 20mm cannons (more like 15mm cannon :)), and I like it. Damage is not as effective, takes more to bring down planes, often run out of ammo too even in a 1:1, and found that the AI still was pretty good against me - they could still easy shoot me down, tho it would take more shots. BUT, whilst watching some furballs, after some time I noticed that some AI would be very carefully following another AI, lined up well doing everything right, but wouldn't shoot - for 10 Mins!!! Just chased abd chased. Perplexing!! Decided probably the reason is as AI are better in terms of lining up opponents (they will shoot more AI down too), fire more (increased firing time in all files), they probably run out of ammo now as well, and they need more to bring down an AI then previously. Probably the "fix" is to change the ai parameter "FightWithoutAmmo=1" in the aircraftobject.ini to 0 for all skill levels, ie, so they don't fight without ammo. I know in the scheme of things this is minor, but its interesting, and just shows how everything affects everything. Any change requires considerable testing. In this case I need to remember to check the mission stats once its complete, to see if that was the case.

Edited August 16, 2007 by peter01

[+peter01 2]

The Ateam have again allowed me to post some alternative FMs - much appreciated.

 

So I'll post once I clean up the files - I do put all sorts of stuff in them, for testing for my own game. Takes some time, so probably on w/e.

 

They are the Camel, Dolphin, Snipe, Spad7, Pfalz, Schuckert, FokkerDr1. Plus...see below.

 

Now, I do like Charles Fms, and always have - generally they feel and fly great to me. I don't think I would be still playing this game without those, and Tex's work as well. So these are only tweaks by and large of Charles FMs, some are very minor (eg, can't even think what I changed for Schukert other than some AI stuff in FM and parameters, or in Spad7 only reduced climb a bit and AI stuff).

 

so why bother doing them.

 

Variety is good, FMs can always be improved (really, in one or two years all of them will be far better too - everyone is learning, even TK i suspect about FE planes at least), and just for the heck of it!!

 

Also to get consistency (performance), at least how I see it, have all planes fly and optimised for Hard FM, and of course beef up AI/fix or reduce issues. AFAIC for my FMs, weak AI, problem AI in the game are a thing of the past. And the feel for some too, of course.

 

So thats what you get. I think they feel and fly well of course, but if you prefer Charle's work, I can easily see that. If you want to make Charles AI more capable with different AI parameters, you could try copying the ones I have to his FMs plane by plane, and using that. No guarantee AT ALL it will work of course, but as I haven't changed his greatly, many will.

 

they are beta again for all the reasons I stated before. doing them as "production versions" would take at least a full week or two or more, and the benefit is marginal to me.....from previous posts from others its pretty evident to me the best improvements are to things that I wouldn't necessarily see or think of. So they are fine, you aren't beta testers as such, but please let me know what you think.

 

I have redone Pup, Tripe and Brisfit, and will post these too but they are fine so it'll go straight to the downloads section with the above rather than here - unless anybody wants me to post them here too withe above. the Pup and Tripes climb has been reduced (they were a bit good, I had been intending to do this, just hadn't worked out the best way), but AI is even better, and made some changes to the feel of Tripe (still twitchy, but less so), and major ones to Brisfit (too smooth before, its very nice now I think, but you will have to rely on your gunner if you tangle with say FokkerD7s).

 

The reasom I mention this is that they were available in late period of these other planes and flying them against these is fun. And they fit very well - Pups and Tripes, still best planes in early 1917, bit outclassed in late 1917 (tho fun and doable flying against Fokker Dr1) - so the consistency is there (reasonbaly) all the way from 1915 to 1918. I am very pleased about this and to be honest a bit relieved it worked out. But it does.

 

So... going sound very immodest, but ya know, there are about 50 FMs!!!.....apart from the feel/flying experience which i hope you like too, that you do find if you use my FMs that the whole war is pretty consistent, the planes in different eras feel different too, the AI are very capable and well behaved, all the (fighters) planes work in Hard Fm.

 

For me, once we had the planes, these were the "hot issues".

Edited August 17, 2007 by peter01

[Nicholas Bell 117]

Anyone else seeing odd behavior of the Alb DVa? Something I've never seen before. Shot both the top and bottom right wings off and the plane flew circles at speed of 5-20 mph and descending slowly? At times this contraption was also climbing at 10 mph.

 

Some component have too much lift or not enough drag? Or is this some aberration in the program that I just have not seen?

Edited August 17, 2007 by Nicholas Bell

[+Tailspin 3]

OK, I'm kind of a newb with FE. How do I use these new FMs? I looked at all the Cat files but these filenames don't exist. I also searched for all .ini files in FE directory with no matches. Thanks for your help! :)

 

buddywoof...Just place each ew DATA.INI in their respective aircraft folder. If you already have a modified DATA.INI in an aircraft folder you can back it up by simply renaming it to orig****_DATA.INI or something like that before you put the new DATA.INI in the folder.

 

The aircraft data.inis for all the stock A/C are located in the OBJECTDATA.CAT in the Objects folder. The addon A/C should already have a data.ini

[+Tailspin 3]

Spin recovery in this sim is difficult at best. Most of the time you don't get out of them. However, I will remember how you did it and use it...correct or not. :yes: Seriously, AFAIK, things like spins and recoveries haven't been explored extensively yet. I think folks are waiting to see what the next patch/addon brings.

[+peter01 2]

Anyone else seeing odd behavior of the Alb DVa? Something I've never seen before. Shot both the top and bottom right wings off and the plane flew circles at speed of 5-20 mph and descending slowly? At times this contraption was also climbing at 10 mph.

 

Some component have too much lift or not enough drag? Or is this some aberration in the program that I just have not seen?

 

Mmmm, well firstly congrats on downing the Alb!!

 

I'm at work so can't test, but nevertheless pretty certain why, and will fix before uploading to CA Download section. It is as you suggest the allocation of things in the FM, combined with damage modelling.

 

Thanks Nicholas for posting and explaining it. I had done a couple of other planes that were ready to go in a similar manner, so can change these before posting. Also I did see this once on Alb Dva as well, but until you used the actual words you used, I wasn't that clear why (actually hadn't worried about it too much just thought it was another one of those odd things).

 

Also, have done a few EWS similarly - oh, well, they will have to wait till I redo stalls.

[+Laton 4]

Hi Peter,

 

Looking good. I should have a bit of a chance to mess with these over the weekend.

 

If you want to take a crack at my Fokker D.VIII and Bristol M.1C feel free.

 

Cheers

[+Tailspin 3]

Woof...I'd say the Technical Support thread at the Thirdwire forums.

[+peter01 2]

Hi Laton, thanks, might do that a little down the track - seem to have my hands full at moment - and especially keen on DVIII. Appreciated.

[FalconC45 162]

Thanks Falcon for posting. I do try to make sure that you can takeoff in all planes, but.....I guess I like them a little tricky, and personally am just keen on getting up in the air and into action, so don't worry to much if some are a little difficult. And of course what makes the plane tricky on takeoff, adds to the character of the plane when flying - the most important thing to me. But your post made me realise thats probably not right - most people would like to takeoff without fighting the plane to do so. I will look at Spad, and probably will change my way of looking at this, so thanks for feedback, appreciated. Like everyone, I need to be quizzed or have things bought to my attention (as you did nicely), to see really if my approach is the best, this is a good example where I can say i have been probably wrong.

 

I forgot to mention that the torque seems to be too strong in the Spad. Very difficult to strafe ditched enemy aircraft even if I turn and bank slowly. I think thats the problem on the runway when its standing on the right wing.

 

Falcon