British Campaign

[TaillyHo]

Absolutely, Creaghorn - that was much like my logic in chosing the Bristol Scout as my first OFF plane: In the fullness of time (and the War), I might come to see this plane with it's cock-eyed gun as a real oddity, but if it's the first plane I fly in OFF (and I can hold my own against the only available enemy kite of that era) I won't know any better, and ignorance will be bliss!

[Creaghorn]

Absolutely, Creaghorn - that was much like my logic in chosing the Bristol Scout as my first OFF plane: In the fullness of time (and the War), I might come to see this plane with it's cock-eyed gun as a real oddity, but if it's the first plane I fly in OFF (and I can hold my own against the only available enemy kite of that era) I won't know any better, and ignorance will be bliss!

 

that's a very cool attitude .

[+Olham]

TaillyHo, a "taken seriously Campaign" is IMHO a Campaign as flown by Creaghorn,

RAF_Louvert and Hasse Wind. These chaps fly them as if they could lose their own

lives; they fly them much more defensive and careful; they make very little kills,

but they survive a very long time.

 

Please don't feel bad about your own flying - I never got anywhere close to their

Campaigns' length myself; I fly far too aggressive; I make a lot of kills that way,

but I am dead within half a year.

I always think to myself, I want to fly it "more serious" like them, but that's only my

conscience - my temper has a totally different oppinion.

Edited May 11, 2011 by Olham

[TaillyHo]

Ah, I understand now, Olham. You have set the bar very high - I am not worthy.

But it is something to strive for . . .

[+Olham]

As I said, don't take it as an insult or anything like that.

It is just, that after flying BHaH for 1 1/2 years now, I think I should take at least one campaign more seriously.

Cause, if I want to last for a whole year or even longer, I MUST fly it pretty different to now.

Not search each and every fight, be on the watch even harder; fly with much more awareness for everyone

else around me to avoid collisions (my main kill reason).

But everyone should feel free to fly OFF as they like. The more "serious" attitude may come sooner or later,

when one has exhausted the hotspur in oneself. (I hope it will come!)

Edited May 11, 2011 by Olham

[TaillyHo]

No offence taken, my friend.

[+Olham]

Alright! Cheers!

[themightysrc]

"I can hold my own against the only available enemy kite of that era"

 

There's the rub - we actually need 1915/16 scouts and two seaters for the Huns, Frogs and Crumpets respectively. We've got one or two, but more would round the game out immensely.

[+Olham]

Well, the early Morane Saulnier with the rear gun will come with P4.

[Lewie]

i see it differently. when i'm in early 1916 i don't know the future (so i don't know what AC are going to come etc. so what i have now is the newest and most modern weapon) and i also don't know what gimmicks maybe other squadrons might have. i just know that an aeroplane for hunting other aeroplanes requires two men. one who flies, one who shoots. but this guy lanoe hawker managed to add a gun to a single seater which is shooting kind of forward without the danger of breaking the propeller. and many are copying this concept (in real there were even bristols with lewis guns on both sides as long as i know). i'm just wondering how the germans can shoot through the propeller. must be a kind of wunderwaffe...

 

Well at that time period I'm pretty sure that Lanoe was a lone experimenter with his angled gun. IIRC it wasn't even a Lewis at first. it was a Lee Enfield 30.06 so you had to also run the bolt in addition to firing the weapon. I mean we put emphasis on historical reality in this sim, I'd think the early war crates could reflect the diversity of the first weaponizing of aircraft, and there's certainly enough evidence that the Bristol was equipped with a variety of guns. The early Fokkers of that time would have been the M5- EI with the first gun synchronization. They would have been powered by the Oberusal U0 which was barely 80 h.p.

 

The thing I'm trying to say is that the game flies the Bristol Scout like it still has a forward firing gun. Have any of you seen an AI controlled flight of Bristols ever make a kill? I've been in a couple of BE2 vs. Fokker EIII fights with Bristol scout escorts, they tend to all get shot down.

 

Yes in 1916 the weaponry wasn't all new to aircraft, but mounting it effectively was, it was part of what ended the Fokker Scourage. The French basically handed the idea that started it off to the Germans with Garro's crash of his forward firing Morane Parasol, which, BTW, should be available as one of the new aircraft in P4.

Edited May 11, 2011 by Lewie

[+Hasse Wind]

It's no secret that OFF P3 is at its weakest when you play early war careers. The best experience is with the 1917-1918 careers. Those years have the best selection of aircraft and squadrons and the AI behaviour suits the late war period much better than the earlier, more restricted air war. It's a huge sim and the devs don't have the budget of a mega corporation, so we all need some patience.

 

P4, P4...

Edited May 11, 2011 by Hasse Wind

[+Olham]

It's no secret that OFF P3 is at its weakest when you play early war careers.

The most users would probably fly 1917 and 1918, so it is absolutely understandable.

As far as I know "our devels" , they will want to complete any gaps and shortages sooner

rather than later. Give them time. P4 is such a sweet dream to enjoy...!

[+Polovski]

Lewie there were as you say various attempts to mount a gun, several of them were rifles and also Lewis guns and also were mounted on the side too or on top etc. Hawker was one but not necessarily the only one with side mounted Lewis.

Given they were experimenting at the time, and there are known instances of Bristol Scouts with a side mounted Lewis gun, then we chose that variant. Also saves us much scarce modelling time making 309 variants of guns - maybe in the future.

 

Two side guns were used by some such as Bristol Scout in RNAS 2 Wing too. We also read comments in "Flight" referring to some craft with the side mounted Lewis too.

 

It's an early craft and meant to emphasise the experimental nature of the period.

 

Yes of course we did make others such as the over wing and 2 side guns at the time, but they never got to be used in OFF at the time and making a rifle variant of course is possible but more time, modellers etc (you remember the discussion we had regarding that?).

 

It is what it is to try to balance it in the sim some. Something we tried very hard in OFF and generally I believe we did that very well. Whilst OFF is not "perfect" in every place I don't know of a sim on the planet that is perfect. If you want perfection the only way is to make it yourself.

 

We chose that variant out of the three we made, because we wanted to, and it was known to have existed, and was possible, and fitted in with what we needed. Good enough.

[+Olham]

If you want perfection the only way is to make it yourself.

Whatever I tried that with - it never worked. You guys are doing a great job!

[Herr Prop-Wasche]

I agree with Olham about the Albatros in 1916 and early 1917. It really feels like a monster fighter, and is more than a match for any Entente fighter of the period.

 

I've worked on toning down the DII a little bit in my tinkering with the Albs FM so it shouldn't be such a monster--but still very effective! At the same time, I'm working on making the DV and the DIII series in particular, a little better than they are currently--particulary speed wise. Unless someone can point me to an authoritative source, I don't think the DII was particularly celebrated as a revolutionary powerhouse, whereas the DIII's were almost universally praised--well, with the exception of that niggling little wing problem!

[+Hasse Wind]

Sounds good, HPW. The D.II should be an excellent fighter, but currently it's actually better than the D.III and D.V, which shouldn't be the case. I like your modified Nupe 28 a lot and use it all the time in my Yankee campaigns, so I'm looking forward to the modified Albs.

[+Olham]

You didn't ask for a Pfalz modification, Hasse Wind? Well, I did - HPW's list is now quite long.

[+Hasse Wind]

I didn't want to overburden him with requests.

[+Olham]

Alright - I know you're a very modest man; so I did that for you!

Edited May 12, 2011 by Olham

[Lewie]

Lewie there were as you say various attempts to mount a gun, several of them were rifles and also Lewis guns and also were mounted on the side too or on top etc. Hawker was one but not necessarily the only one with side mounted Lewis.

Given they were experimenting at the time, and there are known instances of Bristol Scouts with a side mounted Lewis gun, then we chose that variant. Also saves us much scarce modelling time making 309 variants of guns - maybe in the future.

 

Two side guns were used by some such as Bristol Scout in RNAS 2 Wing too. We also read comments in "Flight" referring to some craft with the side mounted Lewis too.

 

It's an early craft and meant to emphasise the experimental nature of the period.

 

Yes of course we did make others such as the over wing and 2 side guns at the time, but they never got to be used in OFF at the time and making a rifle variant of course is possible but more time, modellers etc (you remember the discussion we had regarding that?).

 

It is what it is to try to balance it in the sim some. Something we tried very hard in OFF and generally I believe we did that very well. Whilst OFF is not "perfect" in every place I don't know of a sim on the planet that is perfect. If you want perfection the only way is to make it yourself.

 

We chose that variant out of the three we made, because we wanted to, and it was known to have existed, and was possible, and fitted in with what we needed. Good enough.

 

Well I'm used to opening and editing one or two text files to change where a weapon appears on a 3D file, so you'll have to excuse me, I'm not trying to be rude here. I could with time learn to use Gmax to good effect but so far my attempts with it are less than stellar. No WWI sim on this world is perfect, I'm not suggesting it either, but..

 

Maybe include the over wing Lewis equipped Bristol Scout with P4?

 

BTW my model files are still available, but someone would have to smooth them, because frankly it's the one part of G-max I'm not getting.

[themightysrc]

"Maybe include the over wing Lewis equipped Bristol Scout with P4?"

 

Why ever not? And if they'd be so kind as to chuck a Martynside scout similarly armed into the mix....well....

[Herr Prop-Wasche]

Lewie, what models have you "built?"

[+Polovski]

Oh yes Ok and we'll include all the other few hundred variants we are missing ;) Seriously if all I had to do is edit a text file in 2 mins I'd be laughing ;) and we'd have a few 100 extra craft in my lunch break.

 

First we have to finish P4, and if we have time (mwhahahaha) we'll look at other variants too.

 

We also have to build squads and skins to cope with changes and variants, it all sounds so easy, but just doing it time wise is the issue.

 

You can always send a model and I can look at, polygon wise we use a fair bit higher number in some craft now so often it's much quicker just to make a new one rather than bump up an old model and remap etc. If it is not to CFS3 requirements and our specifications then renaming and relinking and reanimating all the parts takes longer than just making em or using from what we have.

 

I'm about to look at the Scout as it happens so we'll see.

[TaillyHo]

Having campaigned the Bristol Scout a bit, I must say I quite like it as it is. Yes, the gun mounting is 'weird' compared with everything else in OFF, but I like that - and more importantly, it is historically accurate (in that at least some were configured in this manner) and it is currently the only plane in OFF that lets you appreciate the technology advantage the Germans had during the 'Fokker Scourge'. Folks wanting a 'Lewis-over' early war scout can choose the N.11.

 

IMHO, the less credible MG 'arrangement' currently in OFF is the B.E2c. I'd nominate that one for P4 'review', before tampering with the Bristol Scout.

 

 

[+Dej]

IMHO, the less credible MG 'arrangement' currently in OFF is the B.E2c. I'd nominate that one for P4 'review', before tampering with the Bristol Scout.

 

Now that's a sensible suggestion. I'm happy to play the Bristol Scout as she is and would hope the BE gets Pol's attention sooner..