OFF V 1.32D Flak / Archi Poll

[+Polovski 414]

Flak varies depending on location, battle action below, and date. Given that, and that you should dodge and weave some to avoid anti aircraft fire from hitting you, are there enough options to set the Flak to the difficulty YOU want in the sim?

 

NOTE to vote please ensure you are flying with Mini Patch V1.32d or later. Do not vote if you have not updated OFF to version 1.32d or later.

 

 

 

NOTE "AI Gun Fire (Range)" in Workshop is the setting. It effects spread and range. Plus remember EASY is the OLD normal FLAK!

[cptroyce 0]

Pol- I voted enough settings; at least for me. Flak was basically inaccurate except around balloons, where it was concentrated. I guess the three settings should cover most realities.

 

However, if you are offering more of anything..well, "the line forms to the right" ;>)

 

Regards,

Royce

Edited August 16, 2009 by cptroyce

[Hellshade 110]

That's most gracious of you to ask. Yes, there are enough settings for flak and everything else. Now please, take a break before you and Winder have a total meltdown. If anyone has any complaints at this point, I would think they need to point out the WWI flight sim that has more options than OFF does. In fact, point out the WWI that even has 1/2 the options OFF does. Otherwise they can just get over themselves.

 

Hellshade

[Olham 164]

For me there are enough. I'm on "normal" (middle).

Never had a pilot eliminated since god-knows-how-long (three knocks on wood).

 

I wonder, if there maybe computers doing the processes different for other players?

Cause some seem to suffer more.

 

UncleAl's early advice to me, when I was a rookie: never fly straight for longer than some seconds!

Useful advice!

[RAF_Louvert 101]

There are plenty of settings for me Sir. I have the latest and greatest updates pretty well dialed in to my liking and am back to getting my sorry old arse handed to me by your AI aces on a regular basis, thank you very much.

 

Cheers!

 

Lou

[77Scout 3]

Enough for me. My only minor suggestion is someday change the name from "AI Gun Fire (Range)" to "AA Gun Fire", cause right now it sounds like it controls the AI plane gunnery if you don't know any better.

[Rickitycrate 10]

Good lord yes. There's enough doohickies, gadets, switches, patches, lights, bells and whistles now. No complaint here but I think maybe we can all be happy for awile with what we have. Well at least until some new kites roll out of the shop. I look forward to seeing the new birds in what almost seems to be hi-res to me now. OFF BH&H has never been better.

Edited August 16, 2009 by Rickitycrate

[Fliegenhund 0]

Definitely enough for me. The only setting I have tweaked since installing the game was the rear gunner accuracy. I found them to be snipers even when inverted! Now it is much better.

[Guest British_eh]

Thanks for the Super Patch, although I am skeptical as to the FLAK settings as "Normal" being ?

 

As I have become somewhat well read in the last year, with regards to WW1 aviation/conflict, do the settings really reflect what AA ( Archie/Flak) was realistically like?

 

While it is commendable that there are 3 settings for FLAK, we know the "Easy" is a rendition that had some issues that have been sorted out by OBD, and remains as a choice none the less. We also have the "Hard" setting, which I would presume, no one sets as their default. Then we have "Normal". What exactly is Normal? Is it a setting that demonstrates the actual realistic FLAK that was endured by the pilots of the war? What research criteria, consults, articles, were reviewed to decide on the current settings? Do we need to know this? Or do we say, well, they must know? Does OBD need to justify their decisions? Well no, but, in the interest in providing a flight sim that emualates to your PC's best ability, and the limitations of any MSCFS3 hard code, a sim where the 17 hour/2 week mark is attainable by the average OFF pilot, nothing more or less.

 

Just an idea.

 

Regards,

 

British_Eh

[+Polovski 414]

As per emails British_eh.. turn it down in workshop. Correct we don't need to explain "normal". Normal is what it is NORMALLY set to ;)

 

Do not use Normal if you do not like it.

 

Different people have different ideas, depending, as I have said, on region, date, battles, etc etc... and this is asking are there enough options, not what do you believe the button should have written next to it ;)

[Hellshade 110]

Thanks for the Super Patch, although I am skeptical as to the FLAK settings as "Normal" being ?

 

As I have become somewhat well read in the last year, with regards to WW1 aviation/conflict, do the settings really reflect what AA ( Archie/Flak) was realistically like?

 

British_Eh

 

British,

 

AA started out as very ineffective at the beginning of the war and made advances to become more and more dangerous as time progressed, as I am sure you have read. No one single setting is going to be able to emulate that. For me personally, I might set the AA to Easy during 1916, Normal in 1917 and perhaps change to Hard towards the end of 1918. That's the beauty of havong three settings rather than the Dev setting the AA rate of fire and accuracy in hard code and you just have to live (or not) with it.

 

Hellshade

[Bletchley 8]

I have been taking a rest from OFF, so although I am fully patched I havn't flown yet - so I havn't voted in this poll. I would like to say, however, that as wide a range of options as is possible is best, from my experience with older versions. Three was good for me with the last version - I could fly 'easy' in 1915/16, and normal in 1917/18, reserving 'hard' for balloon busting missions and during offensives in 1918, and this worked well for me. If this has changed so that 'normal' has become the equivalent of the old 'hard', then a new setting between 'easy' and 'normal' (to bring back the old 'normal' setting) might be a good idea - but if this is not the case, then I am happy with the existing three settings. Something that is missing from this debate, however, is the linked issue of the mission-type - I routinely skip all missions that I feel are unrealistic for my particular pilot at a particular location in a particular period of the war. So, if I am flying with a German Jasta I would skip all missions (offensive patrols) that flew across the Front, and all ground attack missions. As an Allied pilot I would skip all 'scramble' missions, all ground attacks that were not in support of an ongoing offensive, etc. (and no ballon busting, except in support of an ongoing offensive or through choice). Restricting yourself in this way also restricts your exposure to AA artillery, and therefore makes it less likely that you will suffer too much from it whilst still maintaining its historical effectiveness... As a historical rule of thumb, an average of one pilot career out of ten should end due to AA artillery, but less in the early years (say, 1 in 20) and more in the last year (say, 1 in 5), so if you are experiencing a higher average (and you would only know that after a dozen or so pilot careers) it would be 'realitistic' to move back one notch to an easier setting. And I don't fuss about the 'realism' percentage - my last early-war campaign was flown at 20, but I feel my settings were as realistic as i could get them for that period.

 

Bletchley

[+Polovski 414]

Hi Bletchley,

Thanks for the input, and clarification. AA was to be feared of course, later in the war and I think that's true now :).

We will revise mission directives for P4.

 

WM and myself and others on the team ignore the realism % too, and tune to our prefs as everyone should do. It's a simulation and therefore will never be perfect as real life has a billion more variables involved, although we believe as simulations go it's a pretty good one.

[Hellshade 110]

Hi Bletchley,

Thanks for the input, and clarification. AA was to be feared of course, later in the war and I think that's true now :).

We will revise mission directives for P4. I ignore the rating and tune to my prefs as everyone should do.

 

Indeed, I too ignore the realism number and just set things to what is fun for me. Not to hi-jack the thread, but please consider removing the realism % for P4. I think it would save some heartache for those who just can't seem to get over it.

 

Hellshade

[themightysrc 5]

"Not to hi-jack the thread, but please consider removing the realism % for P4. I think it would save some heartache for those who just can't seem to get over it."

 

Yes please.

[Tamper 9]

I have been taking a rest from OFF, so although I am fully patched I havn't flown yet - so I havn't voted in this poll. I would like to say, however, that as wide a range of options as is possible is best, from my experience with older versions. Three was good for me with the last version - I could fly 'easy' in 1915/16, and normal in 1917/18, reserving 'hard' for balloon busting missions and during offensives in 1918, and this worked well for me. If this has changed so that 'normal' has become the equivalent of the old 'hard', then a new setting between 'easy' and 'normal' (to bring back the old 'normal' setting) might be a good idea - but if this is not the case, then I am happy with the existing three settings. Something that is missing from this debate, however, is the linked issue of the mission-type - I routinely skip all missions that I feel are unrealistic for my particular pilot at a particular location in a particular period of the war. So, if I am flying with a German Jasta I would skip all missions (offensive patrols) that flew across the Front, and all ground attack missions. As an Allied pilot I would skip all 'scramble' missions, all ground attacks that were not in support of an ongoing offensive, etc. (and no ballon busting, except in support of an ongoing offensive or through choice). Restricting yourself in this way also restricts your exposure to AA artillery, and therefore makes it less likely that you will suffer too much from it whilst still maintaining its historical effectiveness... As a historical rule of thumb, an average of one pilot career out of ten should end due to AA artillery, but less in the early years (say, 1 in 20) and more in the last year (say, 1 in 5), so if you are experiencing a higher average (and you would only know that after a dozen or so pilot careers) it would be 'realitistic' to move back one notch to an easier setting. And I don't fuss about the 'realism' percentage - my last early-war campaign was flown at 20, but I feel my settings were as realistic as i could get them for that period.

 

Bletchley

 

 

**LMAO** "Easy is the new hard..."

 

Sorry for the outburst, and completely not contributing to the poll - and not at all to denigrate Bletchly's contribution, for certain...

 

...but that was just funny as all heck, to me, when I read it :) :) :)

[Hasse Wind 46]

I completely agree with getting rid of the realism percentage for example in P4 - it really isn't necessary.

[Siggi 10]

I was testing my FPS a couple of hours ago, on the first hotfix, and flying down on no-mans land at about 25ft altitude right through an arty barrage. Suddenly, out of the smoke and flying earth in front of me I get streams of MG-tracer coming at me from all directions. It was like being in the middle of a firework display. None of it hit me though, which was very nice.

 

Also got around 45fps in the middle of it all (sliders on 53355), even nicer. I was getting a slide-show on 54455.

[+Polovski 414]

Ok thanks guys, I think this one is 80+% one way and been open for a few days now so will close.