Thoughts about P4

[carrick58 23]

Although I think the idea was in the OFF Forum, I reset the ammo in the workshop. For example, When flying Camel Missions

use normal level. then strong for incendiary . Next, use strongest ammo setting for Buckingham Exploding ammo. Spads, Lowest ammo setting for everyday, next level(strong) for incendiary and Strongest for a Cannon Firing A/C

[UK_Widowmaker 571]

Something a bit in-between the pyrotechnic explosions as aircraft hit the ground...and the small puff of smoke we now have, would be nice too

[Olham 164]

The addition of incendiary ammunition for balloon busting would make a nice add to the immersion.

Imagine,we would have to remember to really choose this ammo in the first place (briefing window).

If you forget to do so, the balloon won't blow up.

Would make balloon busting missions much more into something special.

 

Does anyone know, how that ammo type would effect an aircraft fired at?

[Vasco 3]

Hi guys,

 

There's a lot of interesting ideas in this thread to increase the immersion factor and give us more aircraft to fly, particularly 2-seater and multi-engine types. To my mind there one missing aspect of this simulation that would make the introduction of the much-needed missing 2-seaters something everybody would enjoy - to be actually able to perform artillery spotting, reconnaissance and photographic sorties rather than just loiter in an area for a minimum period or fly along the same track multiple times.

 

At this moment in time, apart from a few masochistic individuals who enjoy flying 2-seaters in single player, the majority view reconnaissance and bomber aircraft as 'targets' and there's even been a suggestion to make them purely AI. I must admit that the abiltiy to develop such mission roles for 2-seaters is heavily dependant upon higher resolution and reasonably accurate in-game maps, but other than that the concept appears sound if the CFS3 engine will allow it.

 

• For artillery spotting, actually give the crew guns to direct where the historic clock code and comms can be used to adjust the guns and call down fire on the objective
• For reconnaisance (especially during an offensive), plot positions of defence works, attacking troops and progress (or lack thereof) then have to return to a pre-designated position to drop the reports over HQ like a flare
• For photo recconaisance, equip the aircraft model with a camera and allow the crew the abiltiy to photgraph the target area properly at either oblique or vertical angles as required and have mission success based on whether the entire area or location was photographed successfully. Use the in-game screenshot facility to actually produce mosaic maps that can be viewed during the debrief

Give 2-seaters a proper role other than just claim form fodder!

 

(Just my twopenneth's worth)

 

Vasco

Edited July 21, 2010 by Vasco

[Creaghorn 10]

Hi guys,

 

There's a lot of interesting ideas in this thread to increase the immersion factor and give us more aircraft to fly, particularly 2-seater and multi-engine types. To my mind there one missing aspect of this simulation that would make the introduction of the much-needed missing 2-seaters something everybody would enjoy - to be actually able to perform artillery spotting, reconnaissance and photographic sorties rather than just loiter in an area for a minimum period or fly along the same track multiple times.

 

At this moment in time, apart from a few masochistic individuals who enjoy flying 2-seaters in single player, the majority view reconnaissance and bomber aircraft as 'targets' and there's even been a suggestion to make them purely AI. I must admit that the abiltiy to develop such mission roles for 2-seaters is heavily dependant upon higher resolution and reasonably accurate in-game maps, but other than that the concept appears sound if the CFS3 engine will allow it.

 

• For artillery spotting, actually give the crew guns to direct where the historic clock code and comms can be used to adjust the guns and call down fire on the objective
• For reconnaisance (especially during an offensive), plot positions of defence works, attacking troops and progress (or lack thereof) then have to return a pre-designated position to drop the reports over HQ like a flare
• For photo recconaisance, equip the aircraft model with a camera and allow the crew the abiltiy to photgraph the target area properly at eirher oblique or vertical angles as required and have mission success based on whether the entire area or location was photographed successfully. Use the in-game screenshot facility to actually produce mosaic maps that can be viewed during the debrief

Give 2-seaters a proper role other than just claim form fodder!

i fully agree. twoseaters are the main thing in ww1 aviation (though not in movies). scouts are just so to say a smaller department of them.

actually it should be that the "normal" thing is to have a two seater campaign, and who wants can do a fighterpilot campaign. the opposite like we have now. but of course the more interesting thing for the majority is the fighterpilot.

Edited July 21, 2010 by Creaghorn

[carrick58 23]

Just my 2 cents, Quick Fix for the two seat problem . The added 2 seat a/c could be all or some AI and require the DID two seat pilots to use print Screen for Photo Recon missions. I would think that adding just AI control for the 2 seat a/c would be the simplest

solution.

[Hasse Wind 46]

The addition of incendiary ammunition for balloon busting would make a nice add to the immersion.

Imagine,we would have to remember to really choose this ammo in the first place (briefing window).

If you forget to do so, the balloon won't blow up.

Would make balloon busting missions much more into something special.

 

Does anyone know, how that ammo type would effect an aircraft fired at?

 

It would make hits to the gas tank much more dangerous than when using regular bullets, and generally increase the danger of fires and explosions. But of course incendiaries are most effective against airships and balloons that are filled with highly flammable gas. Incendiary rounds could also occasionally cause problems for the pilots that carried them in their planes. The Fokker D.VII had a problem with its engine that caused incendiary rounds to fire off on their own because of the heat, which must have been a nasty surprise for the pilot.

[rabu 9]

We've got rockets on some of the planes, right?

[Moritz 0]

We've got rockets on some of the planes, right?

Air 2 Air rockets were only experimented with. A Halberstadt shot down one plane with one and then proceeded to burn his own plane. Incendary bullets proved to be better for balloons. No air 2 ground rockets used.

 

2 Seaters I would like to see added: Voisin LA3 - LA5 (same airframe, different engine), Caudron G4, Caudron G6, Rumpler C.I, Farman F40, LVG C.II, Albatros C,VII, and AW FK8. Bombers: AEG GIV, Fredrichschafen G.IV.

[Dej 17]

The addition of incendiary ammunition for balloon busting would make a nice add to the immersion.

Imagine,we would have to remember to really choose this ammo in the first place (briefing window).

If you forget to do so, the balloon won't blow up.

Would make balloon busting missions much more into something special.

 

Does anyone know, how that ammo type would effect an aircraft fired at?

 

You'd have to remember to get your C.O.'s affidavit that you're on a balloon bust too, in order to carry incendiaries and not risk being shot if captured. That would be another possible outcome to add to those we have already.

[rabu 9]

Air 2 Air rockets were only experimented with. A Halberstadt shot down one plane with one and then proceeded to burn his own plane. Incendary bullets proved to be better for balloons. No air 2 ground rockets used.

 

2 Seaters I would like to see added: Voisin LA3 - LA5 (same airframe, different engine), Caudron G4, Caudron G6, Rumpler C.I, Farman F40, LVG C.II, Albatros C,VII, and AW FK8. Bombers: AEG GIV, Fredrichschafen G.IV.

 

 

I thought the Noops routinely used them, not against planes or ground targets, but against balloons?

[Waldemar Kurtz 1]

on recon sorties. I just use screen captures. in the DFW C.V I look through the bomb-sight view and take screen-captures. for other aircraft I'll just look out of the side of the aircraft and take "oblique" screen-captures. it gives me something to do. besides which, if I spend too much time looking for the best screen captures, I might get surprised by enemy fighters (just like pilots in real life).

 

as much as I would love a real-time interactive artillery spotting mission I just don't think it's going to happen. the strain on the game engine would be pretty fierce. it would have to keep track of all of the range-finding information. the best way to think of it is this... you would have to integrate that old PC-Game "Cannon" into the existing CFS3 structure. we'd have to find ways to input the data directly into the game for the battery to open fire, wouldn't we?

 

apart from myself and a handful of other people-- I don't foresee too many people actually using that feature! the other thing to consider is would this feature apply to the player's flight or to ALL of the aircraft in the OFF world conducting the same type of mission? I'm afraid my computer would probably choke on that sort of data.

 

I guess a primitive method would be that if a special 'flare' got dropped on the target, after a certain delay a bunch of explosions would be set off randomly around the point of impact. sure, it would still end up being your ordnance doing all of the work. but maybe that would be a substitute for a fully functional artillery barrage. the added benefit is that if you're flare causes a significant number of targest to be destroyed it would be added to your score. historically, if people successfully called artillery strikes on enemy targets it would go on their record. so I think a specialized ordnance for "artillery spotting" might be the best alternative if a interactive artillery-spotting mission is impossible. cluster munitions and delayed fuse bombs should be possible with the CFS engine, right?

 

 

 

 

[carrick58 23]

Air 2 Air rockets were only experimented with. A Halberstadt shot down one plane with one and then proceeded to burn his own plane. Incendary bullets proved to be better for balloons. No air 2 ground rockets used.

 

2 Seaters I would like to see added: Voisin LA3 - LA5 (same airframe, different engine), Caudron G4, Caudron G6, Rumpler C.I, Farman F40, LVG C.II, Albatros C,VII, and AW FK8. Bombers: AEG GIV, Fredrichschafen G.IV.

 

Oh yes, CI and CII Albatross N 11 s:rofl:

[Olham 164]

Rabu: We've got rockets on some of the planes, right?

Not the Germans - I'd love to - I could blow UncleAl out of his occasional Model T.

[Hasse Wind 46]

You'd have to remember to get your C.O.'s affidavit that you're on a balloon bust too, in order to carry incendiaries and not risk being shot if captured. That would be another possible outcome to add to those we have already.

 

I've read that blunt-nosed bullets were used when attacking balloons, the reason being that such bullets cause bigger holes in the fabric, lead to more gas coming out and thus make the balloon easier to burn. Such blunt-nosed bullets would also cause horrible wounds to humans, so at least initially it was common to carry an official permission, which said that the bullets were meant only for use against balloons, not humans.

[Moritz 0]

I thought the Noops routinely used them, not against planes or ground targets, but against balloons?

 

 

They were not used very long, only on a few N16's. The existance of some photos of the Ni16 with rockets caught the imagination, model builders et al until it became a commonly held idea. If the legend sounds better than the facts, print the legend.

[Hellshade 110]

Have any of you tried Creaghorns latest ammo mod? I think it would be great to have the more realistic bullets in P4 as well. In most cases, I bet it will drop the kill rate down dramatically. I can also appreciate that a lot of people prefer the current ammo style with tracers and smoke trails to help guide their aim, so perhaps it would be possible to have that "DiD" settings button in the Workshop that puts all the settings automatically on "DiD" and changes the ammo type to something like Creaghorns mods. Obviously the Devs aren't going to comment, but hopefully it is something worth considering...if it could be done.

 

Would anyone else like a DiD button in the Workshop? What is your opinion of his different ammo mods? I find his No Effects version, which has no smoke trails and no tracers, to be incredibly exciting and challenging. I fought a few duels between an N16 and an Alb DII with no effects and DiD settings (including less accurate gunnery) in place and it really changes how you approach the combat and when you will decide to fire. I find myself being quite stingy in dispensing ammo, making sure that every round I fire will likely count and not firing unless I am right on top of the fellow. Without the smoke puffs and debris falling off the plane to confirm hits, I don't want to risk firing unless I'm sure I will hit because I have no way of knowing how or even if I should be correcting my fire. It's awesome.

 

Hellshade

[Bandy 3]

...I can also appreciate that a lot of people prefer the current ammo style with tracers and smoke trails to help guide their aim ...

[/i]Hellshade

Well, in fact tracer smoke was standard issue (1 in 4 or 1 in 3 load) for both sides during WWI, with the British as early as 1915 though I'm sure it was a primitive version at that point. I'm sure the Germans and French were not far behind given the obvious benefits, and that it only improved.

 

Reading many 1st person accounts of A2A combat, they all mention the web of tracer smoke that was created in churning dog fights. This is part of reality! So eliminating tracer smoke for DiD is not historically correct at all. If you don't want it in your game, then that is another matter...

[Hellshade 110]

Well, in fact tracer smoke was standard issue (1 in 4 or 1 in 3 load) for both sides during WWI, with the British as early as 1915 though I'm sure it was a primitive version at that point. I'm sure the Germans and French were not far behind given the obvious benefits, and that it only improved.

 

Reading many 1st person accounts of A2A combat, they all mention the web of tracer smoke that was created in churning dog fights. This is part of reality! So eliminating tracer smoke for DiD is not historically correct at all. If you don't want it in your game, then that is another matter...

 

If smoke trails were standard, then they should definately be in the flight sim. I'm not the historian that many on here are so I won't be the one to argue with the experts! I wonder if it was as pronouced and visible as it is in stock BH&H or more the smoke trailers that Creaghorn created with his mods where it was harder to see against certain backgrounds like white clouds. The only reason I ask is because now that I think about it, I'm not sure I've ever seen an actual WWI dogfight photograph that displayed smoke trails. I expect to see 10 such photographs posted in the next 24 hours, of course.

 

Hellshade

[Bandy 3]

...The only reason I ask is because now that I think about it, I'm not sure I've ever seen an actual WWI dogfight photograph that displayed smoke trails. I expect to see 10 such photographs posted in the next 24 hours, of course.

Hellshade

Good point, I have never seen them in WWI photos either, but as mentioned, people like McCudden and MvR specifically mention the whispy tracer in their autobios. Perhaps the B&W film technology (silver grain, lenses etc) weren't up to capturing it against a background of clouds/light blue sky; the images always appear over exposed and pretty grainy.

[Dej 17]

I've read that blunt-nosed bullets were used when attacking balloons, the reason being that such bullets cause bigger holes in the fabric, lead to more gas coming out and thus make the balloon easier to burn. Such blunt-nosed bullets would also cause horrible wounds to humans, so at least initially it was common to carry an official permission, which said that the bullets were meant only for use against balloons, not humans.

 

Ah, thanks for that, HW. I knew my extensive reading of 'Biggles' as a kid had left that snippet about permission in my brain, but I thought it was to do with incendiaries.

[Hasse Wind 46]

Incendiary rounds produce more smoke as they go than tracer rounds. Tracers are meant to burn brightly and are particularly useful when it's dark. Of course they also produce a smoke trail, but it isn't visible as clearly as the trail left by WW1 incendiary bullets. I imagine many WW1 pilots often confused the smoke trails of tracer bullets and incendiary bullets and also many other types of other ammunition, especially when fired by the enemy, whose weapon technology they didn't know as well as their own. And how many of them really had enough time to ponder all this in the heat of battle? A smoke trail is a smoke trail, and you know you're in trouble when those trails start getting close to you.

 

All kinds of bullets were used in WW1, not just regular, tracer and incendiary. There were also explosive bullets and armor-piercing bullets in use by the air forces, not to mention all the differences in the shapes of the bullets, the sizes of the cartridges etc. etc. It was not unheard of to mix various types of rounds together when going for a balloon busting mission, for example. Carl Degelow, a German ace with 30 kills, mentions in his book that he used a combination of regular, tracer, incendiary and armor-piercing ammunition to produce the best results when going to attack balloons .

 

We can't (yet) have all this in OFF, but with mods such as Creaghorn's it's possible at least to try to simulate the various types of ammunition in use, even though only one effect file can be in use at a time.

[Hasse Wind 46]

Ah, thanks for that, HW. I knew my extensive reading of 'Biggles' as a kid had left that snippet about permission in my brain, but I thought it was to do with incendiaries.

 

It's quite possible some incendiaries were also blunt-nosed, which would of course create even more horrible wounds in human beings (burning phosphorus etc). The permission was definitely meant to protect pilots flying balloon busting missions. Though I wonder how much protection a piece of paper gives you when a horde of angry enemy troops examine your aircraft and point their guns at you...

[Creaghorn 10]

Well, in fact tracer smoke was standard issue (1 in 4 or 1 in 3 load) for both sides during WWI, with the British as early as 1915 though I'm sure it was a primitive version at that point. I'm sure the Germans and French were not far behind given the obvious benefits, and that it only improved.

 

Reading many 1st person accounts of A2A combat, they all mention the web of tracer smoke that was created in churning dog fights. This is part of reality! So eliminating tracer smoke for DiD is not historically correct at all. If you don't want it in your game, then that is another matter...

 

i've read many 1 st person accounts. from MvR and Mccudden dozen times. nobody of them mentiones anything of a web of trailer smoke. they mention tracers, definitely (MvR mentiones even how the entente is using it more and more in mid 1917 and how he got used to the fact that he can acutally see the bullets come by. so that standart couldn't have been before too much, mccudden and his famous cone of tracers etc.)

also it's definitely true that the technology was there, even pre WW1. but in 1914, 1915 they went up and pursued with farmany and bleriots etc. to hunt down a german with throwing bombs at him and with handrifles etc. so everything was primitive at those time. others used twoseates with m.g. but hardly anyone had ever a kill. you were a celebrated hero when shooting down one enemy, let alone a handfull. reason is because A2A fighting was so undeveloped and primitive. i don't think at those state they used regularly tracersmoke bullets and tracers etc. in airwar.

 

for sure one used later what he liked best. for some tracersmoke bullets were too heavy and affected ballistics too much. also they warned the enemy. others used only incendiary ammunition to flame the enemy, other mixed everything.

everybody can use the version he likes, or none at all. also i never stated that it is a must to use it at the period xy. that's why i wrote maybe and probably. that's how i do it.

 

as a matter of fact i would like to have the trailersmoke have a longer lifetime and not disappear immediately. i also tried to use "real" smoke instead of a .dds which only looks like smoke. but i wasn't successfull (yet) and therefor i offer what we have now.

 

main reason for offering the mod is to make killing harder and to present problems they had in real when using this and that. also currently tracers, smoketrail, incendiary etc. is all combined in one ammunition type. and that i wanted to divide. actually for using any of the types, there should be seperate bullet files (different ballistics, impact power, travelling etc.) and different damage models of the targets and weigh more gunjamming overall, depending of what type you use. but that's a thing we'll see maybe in p4.

[Hellshade 110]

main reason for offering the mod is to make killing harder and to present problems they had in real when using this and that. also currently tracers, smoketrail, incendiary etc. is all combined in one ammunition type. and that i wanted to divide. actually for using any of the types, there should be seperate bullet files (different ballistics, impact power, travelling etc.) and different damage models of the targets and weigh more gunjamming overall, depending of what type you use. but that's a thing we'll see maybe in p4.

 

Not sure that it's possible, but it would be awesome if in P4 you could select ammo type (Tracers, Smoke trailers or Incindiary) on the loadout of your aircraft before each mission starts.

 

Hellshade