What is the #1 feature you would like to see in P4?

[Hellshade 110]

We all have a long list of things we would love to see changed or added into P4. Heavy bombers (which have been confirmed!), more early war A/C (also confirmed) and things like that. But what is the #1 feature that you would like to see added or changed in P4?

 

Speaking for myself only, if I could guarantee any one thing on the list it would be to have the warp / unwarp ability reduced to just needing a 2 mile radius of skies clear of enemy A/C instead of 4 in order to be used. I realize using warp isn't DiD standard and all of that, but it can get pretty frustrating when enemy A/C are high above and nearly 4 miles away so there is virtually no chance of ever catching them, and yet they stay within your 4 mile radar limit and you can't warp to your next flight point. I'm not sure if it's even possible to change that feature, however since those miraculous Devs have done the impossible before, such as making it so we can fly through clouds (cheers!) I figure I'll put that on the top of my list.

 

How about everyone else? What is the #1 feature you would all like to personally see added or changed in P4?

 

Hellshade

[Javito1986 14]

I would love to see a greater emphasis on the role playing aspect of the campaign. A little less randomness in your wingman deaths. I don't really like how they so often just "fail to come back". That makes sense sometimes but it happens entirely too often. Also, if one of your wingman goes down during a mission it's touch and go on whether he's listed as KIA or not in the aftermath. In my most recent campaign there WERE instances when I had a wingman take a hit, go up in flames, and he was indeed killed in action. But there was also instances where I'd see them get blown sky high by a direct hit from flak yet survive unscathed as far as the duty roster was concerned. Course I'd always just manually set that guy to KIA in the dossier but still.

Red Baron 3D did all that really, really well I thought and OFF -is- the spiritual successor so...

[+elephant 36]

Actually, I don't think I have any right to speak as I haven't played OFF yet, but...

I agree with both of your suggestions with Javito's one more suited to my own needs-preferances...

I have noticed a great graphical improovment in the P4 screenshots.

The cockpits looks much similar to RoF ones, the environment in general looks fantastic too.

The one thing I was missing compared to newest sims like WoP, RoF, even FE2 is the dynamic shadows,

casting on the plane itself and in virtual cockpit.

I don't know if such feature is even allowed by the CFS3 engine...but it would be great to have.

(I admit not as a no.1 priority though).

 

Do we have a clue were P4 is scheduled for release?

[Hasse Wind 46]

The current system for squadron casualties is good if the devs are unable to change the extremely bloody nature of air combat in OFF. The AI fights like a Terminator, so it's quite typical to have a battle to the last man and bullet. If casualties were handled dynamically with the current AI, whole squadrons would be wiped out in a few days. And that would be extremely unrealistic. WW1 air combat was dangerous, but not that dangerous. I try to fly carefully, but I can't make the AI planes to follow the same rules.

 

So if I had to choose one feature above all else, it would be an improved, more realistic AI that knows when to fight and when to run and doesn't act like a Terminator. I know this is also the most difficult feature to implement. But the devs have already done wonders with CFS3 AI, so who knows...

[UK_Widowmaker 571]

I'm getting my wish granted!

[Hasse Wind 46]

I'm getting my wish granted!

 

But can you be certain? Maybe the devs are just pulling your leg? What if the new Sopwith is the Sopwith Tabloid?

[Javito1986 14]

The current system for squadron casualties is good if the devs are unable to change the extremely bloody nature of air combat in OFF. The AI fights like a Terminator, so it's quite typical to have a battle to the last man and bullet. If casualties were handled dynamically with the current AI, whole squadrons would be wiped out in a few days. And that would be extremely unrealistic. WW1 air combat was dangerous, but not that dangerous. I try to fly carefully, but I can't make the AI planes to follow the same rules.

 

So if I had to choose one feature above all else, it would be an improved, more realistic AI that knows when to fight and when to run and doesn't act like a Terminator. I know this is also the most difficult feature to implement. But the devs have already done wonders with CFS3 AI, so who knows...

 

 

 

Would it really be all that hard? I would think all it would require would be implementing an array that keeps track of your squadron's casualties during an engagement, takes into account your squadron's morale (i.e. good/average/elite) and the strength of the enemy. I admit I'm new to programming but I don't think that would be overly difficult. Not sure how CFS3's engine is written though.

 

Also, if I may, I'm not so sure that squadrons would be wiped out that quickly. When I mentioned a more consistent monitoring of casualties I of course meant only for your own squadron. For example, in I'd say 60% of the missions I flew in my most recent 50 mission campaign I went out with most if not all the squadron divided into two flights working together. The others were myself leading a flight of 4 - 6 or so. Most of the time everyone would come home safely. In my idea if someone in your squadron does get shot down though then that person could indeed die (depending on a certain probability)... under the current system it's a bit funky when you see John Doe Wingman take a direct hit from flak and not be listed as KIA or Missing on the duty roster after the mission.

 

But see, I'm not really sure how the current system operates because, like I said, there were cases where wingmen shot down on mission, whom I saw get hit and crash and knew exactly who they were by their label, were listed as KIA when we returned to the drome. But it wasn't consistent. But really, it didn't happen so often that the squadron was ever in danger of running out of pilots, I think the most we ever lost in one day was 3 and replacements were always arriving to fill the gaps.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 20, 2010 by Javito1986

[RAF_Louvert 101]

.

 

I'll take whatever improvements our super team of devs magically come up with, but if I were forced to pick just one feature for P4 it would be the Italian and Eastern Fronts and all that those would entail. It's a small thing to ask I know. I don't wish to appear greedy.

 

.

[themightysrc 5]

"Also, if I may, I'm not so sure that squadrons would be wiped out that quickly."

 

My 100th flight in a BE2d saw all but one of my flight of six sent down, and, I should emphasise, behind enemy lines. Yet, having said that, come the mission's end (I made it back sweating!) all but one of those pilots turned up hale and hearty the next morning.

 

Either the devs go with the Terminator like tenacity and accept the consequences across the board (ahistorical, as you end up with piles of dead aviators) and have a rapidly rotating door of pilots and observers, or else you tone it down so that - as pointed out above - the enemy decide to disengage. Example: I've been in scouts and taken on opponents who seemingly will not disengage at all, regardless of circumstances. I've seen entire flights wiped out through this. Would that happen in real life? I doubt it. Unless a flight could drop on the enemy and dispatch them within about 60 seconds or so, I doubt whether they could actually account for all of a formation. I may be wrong, so please correct me if I am.

 

As to the no. 1 must have for P4 - given that I've already nailed my colours to the mast above! - I'd say more two seaters for both sides, and better ancilliary information for players WRT maps, briefings, debriefings, etc.

 

My 2d,

 

Si

[Javito1986 14]

"Also, if I may, I'm not so sure that squadrons would be wiped out that quickly."

 

My 100th flight in a BE2d saw all but one of my flight of six sent down, and, I should emphasise, behind enemy lines. Yet, having said that, come the mission's end (I made it back sweating!) all but one of those pilots turned up hale and hearty the next morning.

 

 

 

 

That's harsh but not implausible. You probably know it, but I seem to remember there was a flight of... oh what was that plane... some new plane the Brits brought in around the spring of '17. One of their first missions they were set on by some Jasta and mauled to death, most of the squadron killed off in one engagement. Robinson's Hornet's Sting depicts a battle based off it. I'm sure someone will chime in and remind me of what aircraft it was in a post or two.

 

Not sure how events like that could be realistically simulated in OFF. In RB3D if by some horrible occurrence you lost 8 pilots KIA in one day, the next day there'd be 8 replacements knocking at the door, but that is just as silly as ignoring their deaths entirely. I suppose the ideal would be to model a squadron getting pulled off the line when it takes such an extreme hit like that, though now we're talking features for Phase 5 and beyond :-p.

 

Rowan's Battle of Britain pulls squadrons off the line if they get mauled horrifically like that. That sim runs on a whole different style of campaign engine than OFF does however.

 

Events like that could be modeled and implemented into a ruleset like 3P without too much fuss I think. Drop your campaign points by 100 or some ridiculously high number like that if your whole squadron gets wiped out on a mission or something, then back to the homefront you go

Edited November 21, 2010 by Javito1986

[MikeDixonUK 5]

Very hard to pick one thing to single out as the number one wanted feature.

 

I suppose I'd join in with the wish for what happens to Wingmen in the game to be translated to the Manager.

 

Other close contenders would be:

 

Improved AI (Not that the current AI isn't good, but it's the never ending quest to make life harder for ourselves.)

Less bloody battles (already mentioned.)

Early War Aircraft.

Cockpit view Propeller.

Better night lighting.

Enhanced Ground Battles (I like to bomb things.)

Sopwith Dolphin.

 

And if we were going for a dream list, I'd say less ridgid ground crashes (ie when you touch the ground slightly with a wing, or prang a wind sock and it's the game over screen) - a bit more like in IL2, where wings and wheels and the like can snap off and you end up rolling along the ground.

 

And I get a strange feeling in OFF that I can't quite explain - it sometimes seems as if the world is moving around me, as opposed to me moving around the world - not sure what it is that causes it though, odd.

 

Im sure whatever we get will be amazingly brilliant either way!

Edited November 21, 2010 by MikeDixonUK

[carrick58 23]

accountability for wingmen and Warp down to 2 miles,but with that said I would settle for more 2 Seater s Flyable or AI driven

[Javito1986 14]

The issue with warp is a good one but honestly it doesn't REALLY bother me personally. I try not to warp too much anyway. Buuuut I admit there are times I do, when I don't have an hour and want to advance my campaign. I can't imagine it would be too hard to edit it from 4 miles to 2 miles. The only real trouble with that is that it might hamper you unrealistically since 4 miles gives you much more time to get into a good position than 2 miles does, which I suspect is why it was set to 4 miles in the first place. Maybe an option in the workshop so you can choose which you want?

 

I do understand it's annoying when you get pulled out of warp with enemies waaaaaaay above you and you have to fly around for 10 minutes waiting for them to get far enough away. That happens. But sometimes those enemies are Fokker DVIIs who drop down and play with you, and that always livens up ones evening I find

[77Scout 3]

So if I had to choose one feature above all else, it would be an improved, more realistic AI that knows when to fight and when to run and doesn't act like a Terminator.

 

Same for me. It will make the air combat more historically correct, plus until we have this there will be be no way to realistically implement a true accounting of squadron members deaths (which is also a much desired feature). As stated by others, as it is now your original squad mates would typically be all dead within an unrealistically short time span. It all comes down to creating an impression that your squad mates are real and that protecting them matters.

[Javito1986 14]

AI is a bastard to program, you'd have to really delve deep into CFS3's code to get at it. Then again I suppose OBD obviously has access to that. Once you did though I suppose you'd have to implement a way for the AI objects to attack their enemies only up until a certain point or variable, then break away. It'd be hard to decide what those variables would be. Ammo? Superiority of the enemy craft? Morale hit (friendly casualties)?

 

From my understanding the rookie AI right now is set to retreat quite more often than the aggressive AI. I suppose you just have to narrow it down and enhance it a bit more. It's not really so much a matter of "retreating" anyway, rather "Okay chaps, that's enough for now, let's head home".

 

Things have gotten better though. Back in RB3D an engagement was do or die. You had to kill each and every single one of the enemy planes, and if you ran they would pursue you all the way back to your aerodrome. Rowan's BoB came out not too long after, it had really great AI I always thought. The Germans will always disengage you after a while, though I suppose the programmers can always base that on a very consistent variable (their fuel).

[NS13Jarhead 6]

My suggestion has nothing that has to do with the actual simulation. But I'd like to be able to see a preview of the skins to be selcted as the default. There are so many to choose from, it'd be nice to see them before selecting and going into a mission.

[markl 1]

Now I do not use the campaign, so for me quick battle options different targets and or mixes etc. I am probably in the minority so I do not expect anything from my wish.

 

My real biggest wish would be just plain old code optimisation so us people with old dual core PC's can play it and of course the current DRM free installation.

 

Apart from that what ever we are given.

 

Cheers MarkL

[Morris 2]

Well, I agree with all of the above.

 

There are a few technical or CF3 issues that would be nice to fix.

 

1. Better FFB support

2. Memory issues. Playing DID campaign and the OFF manager kicks you out of the game after flying 120min + (I have 12gig ram on my system)

3. Crrossfire and SLI support

 

M

[Stratos 3,192]

I will love to see that WARP suggestion come true. The reduction of the warp zone to 1 or 2 miles of the enemy aircraft will be really amazing. Like Uncleal will apreciatte some naval planes, specially If they can operate from water.

[carrick58 23]

I will love to see that WARP suggestion come true. The reduction of the warp zone to 1 or 2 miles of the enemy aircraft will be really amazing. Like Uncleal will apreciatte some naval planes, specially If they can operate from water.

 

If OFF had Sea Planes

 

 

[foreigndevil 0]

My suggestion has nothing that has to do with the actual simulation. But I'd like to be able to see a preview of the skins to be selcted as the default. There are so many to choose from, it'd be nice to see them before selecting and going into a mission.

Good point!

 

If OFF had Sea Planes

 

 

Another good point!

 

Good point!

 

 

Another good point!

 

Auto shadowing (but I guess it's impossible).

[vonOben 55]

Hi

 

I have similar opinion as Javito1986:

 

My first choice would be that what actually happens in a campaign mission has affect on the continuation of the campaign.

So if your wingman is killed he is killed and doesn’t continue flying, which I find very unrealistic as it is now.

 

This would improve the immersion in the OFF campaign!

To make this work the AI behavior needs to be tweaked to get realistic losses and the AI must also be able to land without flying into trees or into the ground!

As it is now my entire flight usually get killed when they land which is not realistic at all. :suicide2:

 

Cheers

 

vonOben

[Hellshade 110]

The current system for squadron casualties is good if the devs are unable to change the extremely bloody nature of air combat in OFF. The AI fights like a Terminator, so it's quite typical to have a battle to the last man and bullet. If casualties were handled dynamically with the current AI, whole squadrons would be wiped out in a few days. And that would be extremely unrealistic. WW1 air combat was dangerous, but not that dangerous. I try to fly carefully, but I can't make the AI planes to follow the same rules.

 

So if I had to choose one feature above all else, it would be an improved, more realistic AI that knows when to fight and when to run and doesn't act like a Terminator. I know this is also the most difficult feature to implement. But the devs have already done wonders with CFS3 AI, so who knows...

 

I agree with this wholeheartedly, however it brings up a question for me. How did enemy aircraft disengage back then without getting blown out of the sky once they turned for home. If they were much faster, or able to outclimb or dive their opponents, then I can see how they might be able to disengage. However in the case of machines that are more or less equal, how did they break off from the fight without getting hammered?

 

Also, I'm a bit worried that implementing a system where more planes try to leave the combat might end up actually pushing the player pilots kill tallys even higher. I know when I damage an enemy aircraft and it starts to limp away from the fight, it's usually a fairly easy kill at that point. I almost want to say that a possible solution could be to up the amount of damage the planes can take, that way you have a lot fewer rounds of ammo left to take down so many planes per mission and it's more likely that planes will fly home badly damaged but out of ammo just like it happened in real life. Perhaps double or even triple the amount of punishment a plane can take before it becomes unflyable, except for the pilot and the engine as even a few rounds in either of those would generally be enough to put it out of action.

 

Also, if the AI runs out of ammo, perhaps the devs could make a switch that automatically causes the plane to turn and head for home? (Unless AI planes have unlimited ammo, I don't know) That might be a lot easier for the Devs to program than changing the "bloodthirsty" nature of the AI. They will still fight, but fewer planes will be able to be shot down because of the extra damage they can absorb and more planes will turn away from the fight once they have expended their ammo, quite possibly without getting a kill. Further, even if you do chase down a plane trying to disengage, because they can absorb extra damage they won't be quite so easy to score a kill off them.

 

If it were possible, and I'm not saying that it is, perhaps the Devs could program the AI so that when they try to disengage they don't simply fly straight and level at cruising speeds. They fly as fast as their engines will take them and they employ some bobbing and weaving so as not to be such an easy mark. Better still if Veterans or Aces can bob and weave more often than Rookies.

 

Herr Prop-Wasche, how hard would it be to make a change the 2.2 Damage Model (call it 2.2HC for "hard core") so that each plane had double the number of "hit points" just to test the basics of the idea? Is it a massive amount of work? I would like to try that out to see if it makes a real difference.

 

Any other ideas on how this dynamic could be changed so it's not a "fight to the last man" every encounter?

 

Hellshade

Edited November 23, 2010 by Hellshade

[carrick58 23]

:blink:I kinda agree. A damage model would have to depend on shot placement. I don't know if it can be done. The math would be a headache by itself. For example, During the war, How many rds in a burst hit and where with a realistic Spread. Whatever the amount, corrupted it to more hits in less damaging areas. Oh I gave myself a headache just thinking about it.

[Hellshade 110]

:blink:I kinda agree. A damage model would have to depend on shot placement. I don't know if it can be done. The math would be a headache by itself. For example, During the war, How many rds in a burst hit and where with a realistic Spread. Whatever the amount, corrupted it to more hits in less damaging areas. Oh I gave myself a headache just thinking about it.

 

The Damage Model is location based, so it might (I think, I'm not the expert) be possible to double or triple (or whatever is deemed appropriate) the amount of damage that each area of the plane takes except for say, the pilot and the engine, which would definately give players an incentive to aim well when shooting for the very places the real pilots aimed for.

 

For players who find shooting the planes down to be hard enough already, the solution would simply be to change the Gun Strength setting in the Workshop to Strong or Strongest, which should compensate for the extra hit points the planes would have. This is actually beginning to look plausable. What does everyone else think?

 

It would definately server to lower the Player Pilot kill tally to be more in line with History and fewer fights should end in one side being completely wiped out (assuming the AI doesn't have unlimited ammo). Plus for players who didn't like the added difficulty, just one setting change in the Workshop would effectively bring their killing power back to where it is now.

 

Does anyone know for sure if the AI does or does not have unlimited ammo?

 

Hellshade

Edited November 23, 2010 by Hellshade