DiD, should there be another, ( and more) options? Survival in the Air

[Guest British_eh]

There seems to be an interest in expanding the survival Standard to include a variety of settings that are within OFF.

 

Thanks to Siggi and all who contributed to DiD, the Standard to which a number of players fly to, (including myself within the Krauts vs. Crumpets Campaign).

 

However should we look to expand the options within a Standard that can be demonstrated to meet historical research and the parameters of our PC’s, and augment the Tips and Cheats within the General Help Sticky?

 

 

 

Cheers,

 

 

 

British_eh.

Edited February 27, 2010 by British_eh

[carrick58]

The poll was interesting good Idea British eh Kudos

[UK_Widowmaker]

Yes, great Poll

 

The two voters who voted 'No' to question 5....shame on you!

 

If we don't bring Noobs on board, OFF will become a total fanboi release!

[+RAF_Louvert]

.

 

This poll should prove enlightening, British_eh. I know I am always looking for ways to make this sim even more immersive than it already is. My roll-of-the-dice engine trouble emulator is one such idea and it works quite well.

 

WM, as to those 'NO' votes on number 5: If there weren't such contradictory viewpoints in life we wouldn't have wars; and if we didn't have wars we wouldn't have this sim; and is that really the kind of world you want to live in? A world without OFF? Oh, the humanity!

 

.

[+Dej]

I voted, because I think this poll could offer some insights into the community's thinking but I confess I'm not entirely sure what is being asked for.

 

Full DiD is binary, it either is (and by Siggi's rules in the absence of any other) or isn't. But at less than full it allows modifiers such as DiD/T or DiD/L if you want labels to indicate how difficult a flying experience you've chosen for yourself... so it's customisable to a degree.

 

Or are we being asked collectively to give a guide to what 'aids' to unselect when, as part of a new player's learning curve... so that they can get to full DiD as optimally as possible and to say that a certain set of 'aids' are on or off for different periods of the war? That's already customisable too, insofar as if you want less action fly earlier, if you want to have the upper hand choose the side with mechanical superiority.

 

What I personally think would be more immediately useful to new players (and to me, too) would be a series of common format 'How to fly and fight Over Flanders Fields in the [Name of Aircraft]' guides, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of each machine and strategies for engaging, surviving, winning and disengaging vs. different opponent aircraft. We have acknowledged aircraft experts around (specifically for flying in OFF), e.g. Olham for the Albatross, Louvert for the Camel, Bullethead for the Fee and the DH5 etc, etc.

 

Anyway, kudos to Brtish_eh for raising the poll, be interesting to see the final results.

Edited February 28, 2010 by Dej

[nbryant]

I completely understand the DiD standard and its role in adding a measure of immersion to an already great game by trying to make us actually fly and feel something similar to what pilots of that era may have. Each of us will have hardware limitations that will require us to find the right mix for us but I am still all for remaining as close to the standard as practical. I have done so and it has driven me to begin to fight differently. I am becoming less aggressive and actually beginning to think through my approach...... when I have the advantage. When I am jumped, well, then its all I can do to try and manuever away from the rounds pounding holes in my crate. Even so, I am loving it. With trial and error I will soon find a suitable mix for what I can do with what I have. In time I hope to add either Freetrack or TrackIR and will modify my style even more. So for now I only hope that those in K&C would not mind the occasional deviation from being 100% DiD.

[Guest British_eh]

UNLEAL " As a totally objective observer, DID Lite would be very easy to set-up."

 

I like this "lite" kind of like a Bud light?

 

Cheers,

 

British_eh