FMs for Nov 2008 version

[dangerbird 0]

Hello all,

I'm new to First Eagles but have been keen on WW1 flight sims since the PC games Knights of the Sky.

 

At first I passed over this game because it only focused on planes with inline engines and my favourite planes

are the Camel and Snipe. I only heard of the expansion pack recently.

 

I was initially impressed with the SPAD and SE5 without the expansion pack and actually pleased to be in unrecoverable spins,

though less so in the SPAD.

 

When I added the expansion pack I immediately tried out the Camel only to be really disappointed. This was one of the most

unforgiving, unstable planes of the war but I couldn't even get it in a spin. It turned very nicely but was well behaved,

even compared to the SE5.

 

At this stage I have not applied any mods.

 

I wondered if anyone else felt the same or if some of the mods addressed this. I remember trying Steve Baugh's camel for CFS2

which was all but unflyable. His Triplane was a dream though. Since RB3D there just hasn't been enough interest/resources

to produce games with realistic flight models by default.

 

Anyway, I'd also like to say thankyou to all the modders contributing here.

[FastCargo 412]

Peter01,

 

I want to say thanks as well for all the work you're putting in to what in a lot of ways can be considered a tedious topic...yet can change fundamentally how the sim plays and feels for anyone.

 

FMs are one of the few things I haven't tried dabbling too hard into yet.

 

FC

[+peter01 2]

Thanks Fastcargo. Yes, its a bit of work. But FE has so many nice models, and the dogfighting is fun, its hard not to keep going.

 

Just an update, I'm still away... got to be quick, a holiday is a holiday as far as my wife is concerned.

 

But tested things out pretty well before I left and its looking good. Maybe just couple of things, a few tweaks, a readme, and cleaning up some files. It should be ready a few days after I get back - next weekend or soon after.

 

These are FMs for the early part, mid 1915 - mid 1917. Moranes/Pfalzes to Pups/AlbatrosD3s.

 

I think its excellent. Planes feel great generally (eg, Pup is just very nice to fly, as it should be etc), performance differences between planes is very finely tuned (both FMs themselves and AI), stess modelling for Nieuports, takeoff generally very good. Also loadouts should work fine, and 2-seaters not as lethal or nimble. All planes have tailored AI parameters.... and a real challenge was slowing down the pace of dogfights, less hectic but still difficult/a challenge, and I think I've done this ... it wasn't easy. Its one of the better things about this period in FE with these FMs - its a nice change of pace, the dogfighting isn't as supercharged.

 

Most of the FMs I previously uploaded here are different, mainly changes to the AI, so please re-install, at least all the FMs. A couple of FMs have changed:

 

... the Dh2 is nicer to fly, and is more capable. Its the equal to the Nieuport 11 (but in different ways of course).

 

... stress modelling on Nieuport 11 more finely tuned.

 

... the Morane L/ Pfalz E3 Parasols have been redone. They are far better, probably as good as I can do them, keeping capability within reason. you can certainly successfully dogfight Pfalz E1s, E3s and Fokker E1s in the Morane L for example, but thats about it.

 

Be sure you read the Readme!

 

This set doesn't include every plane model, tho nearly all. I won't be doing any more however, for this period. But there are some improvements/updates I will need to make, in the future, maybe.

 

... Fokker E stalls. I may or may not fix these.

 

... Morane H/Pfalz E1 FMs could be improved, but are good as AI. may or may not redo these.

 

... AlbD1s and AlbD2s are based on TKs AlbDva model. I will do Borts versions after.

 

... gun damage isn't perfect. AI only needs a couple of shots, player needs quite a lot to bring a plane down. A WIP.

 

... no changes to the skill levels in the Aircraftobject.ini. Once I start playing more campaigns I'll consider if that needs changing, ie, AI tougher/more aggressive or less tough/less aggressive.

 

Theres likely to be other minor changes such as AI, may be some problems, but FMs seem pretty right to me... tho I always fiddle around, and if I do, and improve some, I'll upload.

Edited January 17, 2009 by peter01

[+peter01 2]

Can't say I don't exceed expectations!

 

Wife went shopping, dog is tuckered out, so..... tidied up, done readme and file now uploaded to CombatACE downloads section.

 

Should be available shortly.

 

Cheers

[Dagaith 0]

Thanks again Peter!

I noticed though that the Alb D.I and II are based on TK's D.V not D.Va as said in the readme.

Otherwise, great job. Thanks!

[Bandy 3]

Hi Peter01,

 

Really glad, and thankful, you've pulled this together for the FE fall'08 patch. The patch solved a lot of graphic problems I was experiencing, and now with your FM's the AI can fly all those wonderful extra A/C. Sorry I'm just reporting in now with experiences, but haven't had much free time between these thread releases, and now.

 

I've found a lot of difficulty in the N11; it just doesn't want to climb at all, struggles with gaining any speed, and my FF joystick gives me that initial stalling shake while trying even a gentle climb at 50 to 60 mph (all it could muster it seemed on take off). I tried to take off the N11 on autopilot, but the AI take off failed; it just couldn't climb and bunny hopped off the field.

 

I've only had the time to try a few others out. The AlbDV is fine work. The SE5a feels like it needs more drag. It was a big engined beastie, with that fat nose so far forward afterall.

 

A lot of my perceptions of FM's have changed with flying OFF2 (and hopefully OFF3 soon; it's in the mail...) the last few months. I initially didn't like OFF2 FMs at all, as I didn't get any feel/response from the various AC, but over time the increased drag and diminished rudder response of all the A/C FM's began to feel right for the era, as they aren't modern a/c afterall.

 

I know it is a complete matter of taste, so am just putting in a few pennies worth of constructive observation.

 

A sincere thank you for your efforts.

Edited January 17, 2009 by B Bandy RFC

[+peter01 2]

Hi Dagaith, Bandy

 

Thanks for feedback. Can't check what you have rasied out until next week, but some thoughts....

 

You could be right re Albatros Dv Dagaith. What happens when you use the Dva for the model?

 

Bandy re the Se5a and Nieuport 11, you picked my very favourite planes! Favourite probably partly because they have been easily the hardest to do, for different reasons. For example the Nieuport is a continuation of one I did for the original Expansion Pack and wasn't much good, and over a year I probably spent a couple of weeks with it. Same with the Se5a.

 

Se5a is still a WIP - i think I agree partly with what you say, and have done a better one in the last week ..... lot better I think, more stable too. If you are interested I'll post here for you and others to try out. Did the same for FokkerD7 as well.

 

I remember the N11 FM very well - what you described doesn't sound like the current version, but last years? It is true it struggles a bit around 50-60 mph (small engine, in real life its poor climb became an issue by mid 1916), but it is very capable, has no trouble taking off or climbing (tho slowish compared to later planes), the AI have no problem, either generally or when used for player plane...never saw that bouncing across fields that you mentioned for this version.

 

Either you have the wrong version, or I made some mistake uploading? The date of the file I use and uploaded is 3:26pm 17/01/2009? Should have a header in data.ini saying 2009 too.

 

Just as a side note, if you fly the N16 the initial impression is probably is its better then the N11. Its not really, about the same, and the N16 is pretty unstable, stalls are worse, and far easier to lose a lower wing. I think thats neat, cos of course the N16 wasn't any/much better then the N11, in fact more difficult to fly.

 

For me, the current N11 FM is very good (nimble but feels early, slow roll), and very sweet to fly - but maybe that depends on preferences, and quite possibly Joysticks.

Edited January 18, 2009 by peter01

[+peter01 2]

Re OFF BHAH, Bandy, I've purchased it and eagerly looking forward to my copy arriving. They have undoubtly done some wonderful stuff. Its likely i won't be doing much with FE for some weeks as I play it (and another game just released, Jutland, a naval sim).

 

But I don't agree at all re the FMs. i won't go into why, but I have looked at them, even did alternative ones (its quite easy).

 

What i did want to say is that they say the AI have improved in OFF BHAH, and thats great. They don't need to be as good as FE and it will still be good because OFF has a lot more to offer. But I know very well problems can emerge when you have better AI, in that it brings up all the weaknesses in the FMs themselves. Example, say you fly the Pup then the Camel in dogfights - with say the very weak Albatros AI in Phase2, it doesn't make any difference - in Phase 2 you just hope the AI will do something, anything to be interesting! If the AI are better, then the performance differences in the player planes will become VERY obvious - the camel should be a lot better then the Pup, for player and as AI too. I think this may be a problem...

 

If it is, it will be for me too. I can live with weak FMs (no feel, all the same, but with some good and notable exceptions), AI passable (as against useless in phase 2), bugs, but can't play a flight sim game where performance differences are a joke. I hope its not the case.

 

Anyway wish them the best, and if not for me, FE is still good, and I'm sure Rise of Flight will be a truly great game. Happy days indeed!

Edited January 18, 2009 by peter01

[Dagaith 0]

You could be right re Albatros Dv Dagaith. What happens when you use the Dva for the model?

 

The textures didn't work, the plane was all white when using Dva. After checking your .ini, I figured out what the problem was. It's ok with Dv (which is what you've used in .ini):

 

e.g, in AlbatrosDI.ini you have

[LOD001]

Filename=AlbatrosD5.LOD

Distance=50

 

Not AlbatrosD5a! Hence the problem.

[+peter01 2]

Thanks for both raising and finding the cause of the problem Dagaith.

 

I'll fix when i get a chance.

[Nixou 25]

TK has made some changes to gun effectiveness, it seems guns are less effective for the player, but the same, ie, more effective comparatively, for the AI. I'm pretty sure the Vickers is also less effective as well compared to the Spandau and Lewis. These changes would be very easy for TK to make in the game code/parameters, not the gundata files, as there are various levels depending on user selectable settings, and the AI is probably different again.

 

This, actually. I was pretty sure of that, and was going to create a topic, but i see you've understood before.

 

I had the impression Spandau were a little too much effective, after much trials, im now sure at 100%. It took me 9 hits to down an allied plane and (!!!) 2 hits only for AI allies. Those René Fonck's shots are even more unbelievable by the fact that i shot from long distance. I have still got the screenshot showing the plane downed with two bullets only.

 

In other cases, its generally 20 hits of spandau to kill an ally.

 

 

To the contrary, killing a german fighters with vickers take generally between 50 and 100 hits, depending on plane. A fokker D7 can be a real pain to kill, i think it took me 200 hits once ( so 400 rounds shot at least)

 

The easiest way to see that for me is that with spandau i generally down the plane at the first burst, and never with an allied plane.

 

You can see that also by the fact that aircraft flown by AI in AIvsAI battles become more or less overpowered. For example a group of 8 AI dr1 can easily kill a group of 16 AI SPAD13, what looks amazing.

 

Looking at the ini, i would say that bullet speed took a much more importance in damage calculation (if gun were balanced before) as the only main difference between spandau and vickers is 100-200 more speed for spandau. The weight is the same (nearly) and ROF is higher for vickers: 550vs450 for spandau.

[Bandy 3]

I remember the N11 FM very well - what you described doesn't sound like the current version, ...

 

For me, the current N11 FM is very good (nimble but feels early, slow roll), and very sweet to fly - but maybe that depends on preferences, and quite possibly Joysticks.

 

Hi Peter01,

No, it was current version of the N11 FM that I saw give me trouble, but a combination of other errors that was the cause. I had hit Autopilot on take-off (often do) and for some reason my autopilot now activates/inactivates with a single hit on the A-key. Weird, even happens with other planes. Also, you have the blip switches toggle at 99% throttle, and my joystick was only slightly out of adjustment, so the engine wouldn't go into ignition. THIS took a while to figure out let me tell you!

 

If I may be so bold to recommend that blip switches toggle at say 90 to 95% to avoid others experiencing this. I have a Logitech Wingman with ForceFeedback, old for sure and falls out of adjustment every now and then, but it is a great stick.

 

Now that I figured that out, the N11 is great, climbs like crap, but such a beautiful a/c and model. Works well against early fokkers.

 

Thanks

[+peter01 2]

Hi Bandy,

 

Yeah, it is/was a beautiful aircraft, and is a superb model by Monty.

 

The blip switch threshold is set to 95% for all I do.

 

"Climbs like crap" maybe a bit strong, but isn't far wrong - try it against the Albatros D1/D2s, a good AI that uses climb quite well - you do really feel the need for an engine upgrade :).

 

BTW, the N11 in this game climbs almost exactly as quickly as it did in real life. As does the Dh2. And the other one you mentioned too ... the Se5a (my FM). The Flight Model in FE may be too good in roll (tho Ive being trying to reduce that substantially - difficult to do but improved on my previous versions and TKs current ones too), and turn would be better a little slower, but climb is basically correct.

 

I usually test planes for climb from just after takeoff, speeds around 55 - 65 mph, not top speed, as I test other things at the same time, and from experience I know this means you could reduce climb figures by about 10% up to 3000ft if you were flying top speed when you start the test. Actual climb rates are from a book by Lamberton. So for example for current FMs the figs I have from tests are:

 

n11 - 5:30 to 3200ft, real 5:00 to 3200ft

 

dh2 - 3:00 to 2000ft, real 2:30 to 2000ft, bit better then n11, maybe why it was around longer.

 

se5a - 6:30 to 6500ft, real 6.00 to 6500ft

 

Of course not all are correct, for many reasons, often gameplay, limits to FMs, or to reflect actual superiority/inferiority (as I see it at least). EG early plane FMs such as Moranes I did initially to climb 1000ft in 3:00 mins, but doesn't work from a FM perspective (too hard to do, can't takeoff, impossible for player to dogfight in tho AI has no difficulty), so very early ones climb better then they actually did.

 

The reason many are correct is partly an effort on my part, but largely due to TKs Flight Model and how he has done the FMs. For example, I based the climb in my FMs in the Expansion Pack around his Camel, which I found was pretty corrrect in climb. As you do other planes to fit in, it sort of works out - before the compromises I mentioned.

Edited January 19, 2009 by peter01

[+peter01 2]

This, actually. I was pretty sure of that, and was going to create a topic, but i see you've understood before.

 

I had the impression Spandau were a little too much effective, after much trials, im now sure at 100%. It took me 9 hits to down an allied plane and (!!!) 2 hits only for AI allies. Those René Fonck's shots are even more unbelievable by the fact that i shot from long distance. I have still got the screenshot showing the plane downed with two bullets only.

 

In other cases, its generally 20 hits of spandau to kill an ally.

 

 

To the contrary, killing a german fighters with vickers take generally between 50 and 100 hits, depending on plane. A fokker D7 can be a real pain to kill, i think it took me 200 hits once ( so 400 rounds shot at least)

 

The easiest way to see that for me is that with spandau i generally down the plane at the first burst, and never with an allied plane.

 

You can see that also by the fact that aircraft flown by AI in AIvsAI battles become more or less overpowered. For example a group of 8 AI dr1 can easily kill a group of 16 AI SPAD13, what looks amazing.

 

Looking at the ini, i would say that bullet speed took a much more importance in damage calculation (if gun were balanced before) as the only main difference between spandau and vickers is 100-200 more speed for spandau. The weight is the same (nearly) and ROF is higher for vickers: 550vs450 for spandau.

 

I think your tests are a pretty accurate reflection of the differences I've noticed too, and IMO gun balancing has changed in this version.

 

And the Lewis now seems the most lethal.

[+peter01 2]

The textures didn't work, the plane was all white when using Dva. After checking your .ini, I figured out what the problem was. It's ok with Dv (which is what you've used in .ini):

 

e.g, in AlbatrosDI.ini you have

[LOD001]

Filename=AlbatrosD5.LOD

Distance=50

 

Not AlbatrosD5a! Hence the problem.

 

Noted this on Download description:

 

"Note: 20th Jan 2009. There is an error in the instructions re making AlbD1s and AlbD2s from TKs models. You should copy Tks AlbDv folder and rename, not Tks Albatros Dva as in the Readme. Otherwise you won't get skins - the plane will be white. Thanks to Dagaith for pointing this out. It'll be fixed so that it will use the AlbDva in the future as originally intended (its also for those that don't have the Expansion Pack) when I update the download next."

 

Just thought I post here too, because next download will use the AlbDva model - its for people that don't have the Expansion pack, the Alb Dv wasn't available then from memorey? Also there were some very nice early skins done by JFM for the Dva model.

 

Of course that means people that have changed things now will get the reverse problem in the next download! Fun and games.... The simplest solution then rather then "remaking" new albD1 and albd2 folders from the albdva I think would be just to delete all skins in those folders you created and install ones from the Dva folder. Or change the ini itself, specifying dva lod files by copying from the dva ini if you have extracted it etc.

 

Yeah, simple problem, but fiddily. Apologies for that. In any case i'll have Borts Albs ready by next download, they use the same folder names (for albd1, alb2, not alb d2Late or oef version). Its either Borts or copies of TKs AlbDva, one or the other - reason for that is if people in the future do campaigns there is just one name for these Albs, whatever model is used.

Edited January 20, 2009 by peter01

[+peter01 2]

just an update to let you know what my plans are at this time.

 

there a few things for the early set that I want to do, and in any case I'll finish off within the next week, whatever I have complated. Theres other things/games for me, so that will be it for a while.

 

hopefully everything is okay, but at the very least i'm sure there are ai improvements or ai problems that need fixing, but they take time and playing to identify, and I'll likely find them as I play the game over weeks or months. If anyone is seeing ai issues now, let me know if possible in the next week.

 

I'm redoing the avro and martinsyde scout, and they will be better. but early planes are hard to do. actually apart from the Albs each one has been terrifically hard, mainly due to stability problems - its the expansion pack fm style and/or there are some things I don't know how to fix. I try to reduce the stability problems but its tedious, every time you change the FM it needs to be redone, and ultimately very limiting. in addition, slow roll, and limited turn make it hard to do nice FMs - but I do my best :) for many, not all, due to time considerations... its just too time consuming for planes that I or others will hardly ever fly. I think most of the difficulties are due to the engine power - replace a 80hp with a 110hp or 130hp engine, and most stability problems disappear, and its a better FM too..but too good, too capable, and not how it should be. These problems weren't problems in the original FE FM style.

 

i'll be redoing the fokker e1 and e3s, and uploading the e3 2-gun version (same fm) - started redoing them and they seem pretty good, but are different then the current lot available... more gritty. It was necessary to redo the FMs to reduce (not completely eliminate) the funny stalls. BTW not sure what people think about the rudder capability, but I like it for a number of reasons: the fokkers probably did have effective rudders, and if used well by the player the Fokkers are reasonably effective. Too little, pretty useless in dogfighting, but too much causes stalls very quickly due to drag. the rudder needs to be used appropriately, and then these are reasonably effective as dogfighters. Had a lot of great dogfights against the Scouts, my main AI opponent in testing. Its a bit of a challenge, and not planes for a novice.

 

I'll also do Borts Albs as alternatives with cockpits from the AlbD3 done by Sinbad. Borts Albs are nice, certainly look the part, and there are some skins around.. The reason I don't do them by default is they seem to slow my FPS significantly more then most (as do Borts other planes). Not sure why, maybe the way the texture is done?

 

then that it'll be it...thought it would be nice having an early set...tho I have to say regreted doing these instead of late war FMs many times over the last few weeks because of the difficulties I experienced.

Edited January 20, 2009 by peter01

[+Tailspin 3]

I think most all WWI A/C had very effective rudders and elevators. What most didn't have was very effective ailerons. Proper rudder control during advanced maneuvering was essential in avoiding stalls. The Fokker DVII was probably the only aircraft of the era that could be considered to fly like a "modern" 30's era aircraft...speed being the main difference. Yet since the EP they all do. I still don't get why this was done. If it was to introduce spins into the sim....well they still don't "depart" like they should...IMHO of course.

[+peter01 2]

Well the answer to that Tailspin is obvious to me: the new Flight Model was done for TKs Jet Sims. WOI and FE use the same game engine.

 

After WOI came out I looked at TKs jet sims a bit more from a FM perspective.

 

First, the new jet FMs are better - there aren't any negatives. Unfortunately the FE FMs tho good in many ways are supercharged in comparison to the original FE ones. Not so good for ww1.

 

Secondly, its not harder doing Jet Sim FMs now then it was before. FE FMs are far far harder now with this new Flight Model - takes me at least 3-4 times as long compared to original FE, almost impossible to do really well, and always too smooth. I'd say TK had a lot of difficulty in doing his FMs for FE in EP initially.

 

Thirdly, and I'm not 100% sure of this cos I didn't fly many of the Jets, but nevertheless think its the case, the migration path for older style Jet FMs is easier. The earlier Jet FMs still work reasonably in the new games like WOI. Not exactly as before, but nothing like the change in FE - which was huge.

 

So IMO, FE, and the ww2 guys, got the short end of the stick... still riles me to be frank.

Edited January 20, 2009 by peter01

[Heck 496]

I think most all WWI A/C had very effective rudders and elevators. What most didn't have was very effective ailerons. Proper rudder control during advanced maneuvering was essential in avoiding stalls. The Fokker DVII was probably the only aircraft of the era that could be considered to fly like a "modern" 30's era aircraft...speed being the main difference. Yet since the EP they all do. I still don't get why this was done. If it was to introduce spins into the sim....well they still don't "depart" like they should...IMHO of course.

 

You hit it right on the head, Tailspin. A near perfect explanation of how WW1 aircraft controls actually worked, from what I've read over the years, and the perfect explanation of why Wolfgang Langewiesche wrote "Stick and Rudder." Many pilots trained postwar were using the rudder to initiate turns, and using the ailerons to "help out." As a result, they were often killing themselves in cross control stalls and spins, which is why Langewiesche wrote the book. They had learned an uncoordinated technique, because the instructors of the 1920's and 30's were wartime pilots who used this technique themselves, because that's what they had learned to do flying WW1 machines, and the reason the instructors used this technique was the nature of the wartime planes they had learned on.

 

This is the one place where I disagree with TK's new flight models. These aircraft roll much too quickly. They respond much too well to aileron control. WW1 ailerons were sloppy and inefficient, and the designers were just beginning to understand things to overcome adverse yaw like washout (the Albatros fighters) and differential application. Most ailerons were subject to tip stalling, where you would get a roll in the opposite of the intended direction by overzealous use of the controls, but I don't think this can be modelled in the sim. I get the impression that TK changed this to get a more zippy feel to the sim, possibly to appeal to a wider audience, possibly because of AI changes, but I honestly feel it's not realistice at all. I'm taking a look at my old data.ini's compared to the new ones to see if I can discover what what changed that would affect this. If I discover it, I'll post the information, so people can experiment and see if changing it affects the AI's handling of the aircraft.

[OlPaint01 0]

Salute! Peter01

 

I have spend the entire week adding your 1915_17_FE_Plane_FMs_for_Nov_2008 mod to a fresh install of FE_EP1_Nov08. I have learned a great deal tweaking the Weapons in Weapondata.ini and editing the _LOADOUT.ini files. I have flown every a/c in the current list and I am amazed at how well the planes perform. The stock FM usually gave me bad side slip into a non-recoveralble stall with the earth coming up to meet me. Your FMs allow me to pull out of a stall condition and recover. Great work!

 

One thing I would like to know... I am observing that that my AI observer/gunner has lost a great deal of his killing accuracy with this latest FM set. The O/G does not fire his MG as often or track the attacking a/c as well as I remember in FE_EP1_Oct07. Is there a way to increase my gunner's skill? It used to be that my flight of bombers could knock down an attacking swarm of scouts with ease. Now, when the enemy scouts approach, my flight scatters like a bunch of frightened ninnies instead of holding formation. Now I am lucky to escape with maybe a wingman. All the rest of the mission ends up augering in. Any Suggestions?

 

OlPaint01

Edited January 29, 2009 by OlPaint01

[+peter01 2]

One thing I would like to know... I am observing that that my AI observer/gunner has lost a great deal of his killing accuracy with this latest FM set. The O/G does not fire his MG as often or track the attacking a/c as well as I remember in FE_EP1_Oct07. Is there a way to increase my gunner's skill? It used to be that my flight of bombers could knock down an attacking swarm of scouts with ease. Now, when the enemy scouts approach, my flight scatters like a bunch of frightened ninnies instead of holding formation. Now I am lucky to escape with maybe a wingman. All the rest of the mission ends up augering in. Any Suggestions?

Hi OlPaint01,

 

Yes, there have been changes.

 

Thought it was necessary due to gun damage effects: the AI (both fighters and AI gunners) have always been extremely accurate, and with changes in this patch the effectiveness of guns is lethal - one bullet will destroy a plane. Previously gun damage effects could be modified very satisfactorily - but not in this patch. The changes to gun damage (comparative ones for ai versus player) by TK is the worst thing to me about this patch.

 

Did test gunners considerably, and IMO it was unrealistic and almost impossible for the player against a two-seater, and its worse for an AI attacking an AI 2-seater - AI fighters tend to just sit behind a plane and shoot: an easy target for AI gunners. I have had flights of 12 fighters including myself attacking 3-6 2-seaters, and being completely wiped out.

 

So I made many of the 2-seaters less capable, and their gunners and gunner's guns less effective.

 

If you prefer it different, its easily changed with some edits. I'll use Aviatik as an example:

 

Gunners tracking EA

=============

 

In the Oct 2007 version, in following section

 

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

 

PitchAngleRate=45

.

.

 

YawAngleRate=60

 

In the Oct/Nov 2008 version,

 

PitchAngleRate=12

.

.

 

YawAngleRate=12

 

The Gunner's gun accuracy

=================

 

Has been reduced, I use a new gun defined in gun data with "_Gunner" at end, eg, in Aviatik in following section

 

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

 

.

.

GunTypeName=7.92MM_PARABELLUM_MG14_Gunner

.

.

 

Just delete "_Gunner" part, it will revert to the standard gun.

 

Re "flight scatters"

============

 

Not 100% sure, but probably because I have reduced the 2-seaters/bombers ability to maneouver via ai parameters, when they do, they may tend to scatter, ie, find it harder to keep formation. With TKs default AI parameters some 2-seaters were more capable then many fighers.

 

You could delete the following AI sections I have put in the data ini, it will then revert to TKs defaults for AI flight for those planes:

 

[AIData] plus all the skill levels that follow eg [DogfightNovice] thru to [DogfightAce].

[arcadayn 0]

Pete - I want to add my thanks to the list. Your work is awesome! I can't wait until I can have only one install of FE!

[nestor 0]

Peter.

 

Great to see you back, and working on the game again.

 

Thanks for the latest FM's and GunData files. Excellent improvements! Like yourself, the add-on plane's I'm using in the game now are all contemporary with the stock set. The cut off point for me is circa June 1917. That's to say I don't use any add-on planes in service during 1916 (with the exception of the Pup, which was in service from late '16 till about September '17).

 

Of course, it'll be great if you decide to amend the FM's for all the early planes as well, but I think it's a good idea to concentrate on the mid to late war stuff for now.

 

FWIW, here's a list of the add-on's I'm using which I find work reasonably well using your last FM pack, especially as AI planes:

 

Breguet 14

Bristol F2b

FE2c (which I've renamed; FE2b)

Fokker D.VIII

Hanriot HD1

Junkers D.I

Nieuport 27

Pfalz D.III

Pfalz D.XII

Pfalz Dr.I

SSW D.III

Sopwith Pup

Sopwith Triplane

Sopwith Snipe

Spad XII

 

 

Hi Southside Bucky

 

Thanks for that list, will save me lots of time.

However I seem to have trouble in locating some, eg the Pfalz Dr.I - would you mind to specify which FM pack of Peter you are exactly refering to? :yes:

Bunches of thanks to peter to

[Southside Bucky 1]

They're all in this pack:

 

http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?autoc...p;showfile=6918

 

Be aware that Peter has updated some of 'em though...So where applicable, use his latest versions which will obviously work much better.

 

Incidentally, the FE2c name change should read: "Which I've renamed FE2d".

 

All the best.

 

Bucky

Edited February 6, 2009 by Southside Bucky

[Bleddyn 0]

Question for Southside Bucky... Earlier in the thread you gave a list of planes that you said seem to be working well with the last FM pack. There are 2 of these I have a question regarding.

 

Hanriot HD1 - I have not seen this model anywhere.. I may be blind lol. The only places I know of for FE add-ons are here, Skunkworks and Bortdafarm's site, am I missing some?

 

Sopwith Triplane - Again I may be blind but I didn't see an FM for it in any of the FM packs I have found. I do have the model.

 

Thanks in advance! :)