Saint19 0 Posted February 21, 2010 Hi all, Being new to WW1 aviation I'm finding it really fun. FEG has been great. But I also tried out the free version of RB3D and OFF Phase 2. I've noticed that in OFF in particular the planes are sooooo sluggish compared to FEG(Peter01's FM's). In OFF it feels as if I'm flying a brick....in particular the SPAD XIII. So how do we know which sim comes closer to what it was like? Were the planes really as maneuverable in real life as they seem in FEG? ...or were they closer to OFF and RB3D(Hells Angels)? Just curious as I'm trying to learn. Thanx for your help. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Slartibartfast 153 Posted February 21, 2010 (edited) Well I have both and I find that the FE flight models are too easy... The OFF flight models in Phase 3 are a delight I havn't flown Phase 2 but from what I understand they where revamped... To me OFF Phase 3 is the one... Also the Spad wasn't the at its best in dogfighting it was more boom and zoom was more of an energy fighter e.g. F-4 not a Mig-17 Edited February 21, 2010 by Slartibartfast Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JFM 18 Posted February 21, 2010 IMO RoF has the best representation of flight, although I'm greatly disappointed with many other aspects of that sim. OFF Phase 3 is good but some of their models are a bit odd. I.e., that five second delay between throttle input and engine reaction in the Albatros D.II is mega annoying, and a B-52 could out maneuver their SPAD VII. Plus, if you get a single bullet through an aileron your roll rate decreases 50%. Still, though, there's much to like about OFF, too. Fortunately I have no allegiance and can enjoy them all when the mood strikes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bandy 3 Posted February 21, 2010 Well, I used to think the FE flight models were a little too spritely for canvas and stick aircraft, BUT I agree with you that OFF flight models seem to be at the other extreme and are on the heavy side. [Damage models are completely different kettle of fish, and OFF just rocks there! Well, maybe not the one hit=50% aileron reduction, I hear you there...] Then a few years ago I saw Howard Hughes' "Hell's Angles" for the first time (yes I know, sacrilege! But I'm not that old) which used period aircraft in the production (as well as period pilots from WWI ). When you see those Fokker DVII's buzzing around, diving, climbing, doing flick rolls, loops, etc. etc. etc. I'm pretty sure that FE is closer to the truth, even if the DVII was one of the best in WWI and not representative of all crates/buses. And besides, the FE stalls and spins seem to be much more realistic AFAIK (no pilot here), or at least the aircraft get into a spin and then responds to a spin the way they are supposed to. Pros and cons to each, and I love simming in them for different reasons. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Saint19 0 Posted February 21, 2010 Heh...funny I just saw Hell's Angels this evening. I came away with the same thoughts about the D7's agility. But I kept telling myself, "well its just a movie." But to me Phase2 seems to be very sluggish in comparison to FEG. I have no allegiance to any sim. But I am curious. Before I plunk down money for Phase 3 I wanted to try Phase 2. Seeing the lowly AI in Phase2 scares me. Although I hear its greatly improved in Phase 3. But in FEG I like the AI. I just wish it had a great campaign. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
