WOFF FM Thread

[Adger 85]

Hi Robert..TBH i cannot nail down what the difference was,for me it just felt right, it felt like my hand fitting comfortably in a glove rather than me squeezing it in..BTW in no way im a dismissing WOFFs FM,s ,i just like what Gav,s achieved

The rudder issue that Gav mentions is a definite difference.But as in my above post JSGME at this moment is killing my FPS,so until i cure that little problem im going to fly with WOFF,s stock DVa Fm...cheers  

[+gavagai 0]

JSGME hurting your fps is a new one to me.  I just move folders in and out manually for now and I don't have any trouble.

 

Thank you for the feedback!

[Adger 85]

JSGME hurting your fps is a new one to me.  I just move folders in and out manually for now and I don't have any trouble.

 

Thank you for the feedback!

Your welcome Gav,thank you for your FM file,ive just used it to freeflight around my airfield..i felt so in control just to add,Ive noticed (at least on my system) that if i click on the x in the top corner of JSGME my Mods still load..if i click on the close button on JSGME yes they still load BUT i have a 15-18 FPS drop..i tried this 4 times to be sure and everytime it dropped my FPS.So i just click the x and everythings spot on..thank you once again Gavagai

[+elephant 36]

Guys, I'm sorry again...

I explored the files I uploaded (with gavagai's Mod) and the file structure was not correct to be used via JSGME.

I'm afraid neither Bucksnort's (Hellshade's D.V FM) is.

There is folder missing (OBDWW1 Over Flanders Fields)...so JSGME is not installing the FMs in the right place.

Meaning I was having a placebo effect all night yesterday, trying to test, at last, gavagai's FM...

I have also updated my original post... 

 

Alb D.Va 680kg 190hp_gavagai.7z

Edited March 3, 2014 by elephant

[Hellshade 110]

My DV mod for less weight and more HP does include the OBDWW1 Over Flanders Fields folder.    It is JSGME friendly.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/bwvth6nyzegod5e/Alb%20DV%20Less%20Weight%20and%20HP.zip

[Olham 164]

Meaning I was having a placebo effect all night yesterday, trying to test, at last, gavagai's FM...

Well, here's an honest man!

elephant, I have such placebos sometimes, when I want to shade parts of my skins very subtly

in Photoshop. I often brush over that part several times, thinking I'm getting there - just a bit

slowly - until I realise: the layer is not activated. Mwahahahaaa!!!

 

(OT: 'Placebo' had some nice songs - like 'Slave to the Wage'...)

Edited March 3, 2014 by Olham

[Bucksnort 1]

Guys, I'm sorry again...

I explored the files I uploaded (with gavagai's Mod) and the file structure was not correct to be used via JSGME.

I'm afraid neither Bucksnort's (Hellshade's D.V FM) is.

There is folder missing (OBDWW1 Over Flanders Fields)...so JSGME is not installing the FMs in the right place.

Meaning I was having a placebo effect all night yesterday, trying to test, at last, gavagai's FM...

I have also updated my original post... 

 

Hey Guys,

 

I was finally able to log back into CombatAce, but it may be temporary.  My son already has an account here and when I also created one it let me in long enough for my first post but then blocked me as they don't allow two accounts from one IP address.  So they put a fix in temporarily but I may not be able to stay. 

 

Just wanted to say quickly that the JSGME that I posted is for a JSGME executable and Mods folder installed in the "OBDWW1 Over Flanders Fields" folder where the WOFF/CFS3 executables, Ankors Shaders Mod, etc are also located.  If you've got JSGME installed at the root directory of WOFF then it won't work.  It sounds like Hellshade already has that path covered in his post, but Hellshade's won't work if your JSGME/Mods install is with the game executables. 

 

That could also be the difference between Adger's and RJW's tests.  The folder structure will depend on how you installed JSGME and the location of your MODS folder.

 

Cheers!  (this may be my last post)

 

B.

Edited March 3, 2014 by Bucksnort

[Olham 164]

All mods should be written for the MODS folder right in the WOFF folder - not anywhere "deeper".

I have changed the ini for the shaders, which were also written for a "deeper" directory path.

I eliminated that one line which addressed the mod, and now it works fine where it should be.

Maybe you guys could just do the same?

Edited March 3, 2014 by Olham

[rjw 48]

Hey Guys,

 

I was finally able to log back into CombatAce, but it may be temporary.  My son already has an account here and when I also created one it let me in long enough for my first post but then blocked me as they don't allow two accounts from one IP address.  So they put a fix in temporarily but I may not be able to stay. 

 

Just wanted to say quickly that the JSGME that I posted is for a JSGME executable and Mods folder installed in the "OBDWW1 Over Flanders Fields" folder where the WOFF/CFS3 executables, Ankors Shaders Mod, etc are also located.  If you've got JSGME installed at the root directory of WOFF then it won't work.  It sounds like Hellshade already has that path covered in his post, but Hellshade's won't work if your JSGME/Mods install is with the game executables. 

 

That could also be the difference between Adger's and RJW's tests.  The folder structure will depend on how you installed JSGME and the location of your MODS folder.

 

Cheers!  (this may be my last post)

 

B.

I always have my MODS folder under the "WOFF" folder and when I download mods from anyone I make sure the correct Folder structure is in place for that mod. If the mod isn't defined properly by the modder, I create it so it will work. In my case all the mods are activated fine. Just thought I would set this straight.

[Bucksnort 1]

Well, I get to stay!

 

Just got a note back from CombatAce and they have adjusted my account to allow my son and I to both participate.

 

I've told Gav this already, but just for the record I really like his Alb D.Va FM.  I hope he'll share more FM's with us!

[Adger 85]

Just thought id Add that Pol has mentioned That they are looking at the Alb FM,s..."No promises but we are looking into the Albatros FM to see if there are other areas we can improve." to quote Pol directly.

THATS why OBD deserve all the credit they receive IMO,they DO listen to us and any improvements that need to be made will be...Just to add from above postings GAV,s Fm must have been put in the right place by me.Because I noticed a significant difference in flight.

Nice one..Glad your Back Bucksnortt,i used it aswell and i have to admit i really like Gavs FM...Get your Other FM,s posted Gav

[Olham 164]

Good to hear, Buck! I LIKE this place!

[rjw 48]

I will try your suggestion. I know my xfm is in the right place as I validated it before trying the mod. I always look to see the files have been implemented when I activate a mod in JSGME, before using them in WOFF. I'm anal that way. I guess it's my project mgmt background (due diligence).

 

best regards

Gavagai;

 

Thanks for the suggestion of trying the slip turn. I used spot view instead of f3. I can now see the difference. when flying the stock xfm and trying a side slip with full rudder counter to ailerons the craft cannot be held in the a straight side slip approach. It want to keep turning. Your xfm on the other hand makes side slip properly possible.

 

I also tried it in a slip turn and now can see the difference in that yours will hold much longer in a tight turn before reaching stall speed.

 

I guess what I was lacking was the visual confirmation that I needed. I wasn't feeling it before hand.

 

You have achieved some nice improvements in the handling sir. As for how the DVa should really handle I don't know. I would surmise that a side slip should be possible and your xfm makes it so.  I now feel that the devs should look at this and make a judgement call if possible.

 

Best Regards;

[+gavagai 0]

The tighter turn is from 2 things:

 

1. the reduced loaded weight to 914.5kg

 

2. A more efficient L/Dmax compared to the default.  The CLmax on the default Albatros is also very low, which is what made me suspicious.  The CLmax of the Goettingen 174 airfoil is publicly available data, around 1.41.  The CLmax of the WOFF Albatros D.Va is only 1.14.  I don't know if that was a typo or not, but it is similar for all of the Albatros scouts, so it seems not to have been a mistake.

 

I don't think the turn is excessively good, however.  Just yesterday I found it a chore to keep up with a Spad 7 in a flat turn, and then the AI Spad I was chasing entered a climbing turn that I could not follow.  As always, more feedback is welcome.

 

-----------------

 

When I have more time I'll post a jsgme of the FMs I have adjusted and find satisfying.

[Olham 164]

What is a "slip turn", guys?

[rjw 48]

What is a "slip turn", guys?

Olham;

 

think of it as rudder in opposite direction of ailerons in a turn! (left turn, left aileron, right rudder). You probably do it instinctively and just don't know the term.

[+elephant 36]

So is it safe to use your wing rudder moddifications (corrections) in other models as well (D.V early and uprated)?

Or the wing strenght is a factor to be considered? (D.V more vulnerable than D.Va)

 

I have flown a few fights and I like the result (the plane seems more flyable)...

Sometimes there are obvious mistakes like the one you described above (typo) or the wrong weights used in Albatrosse,

deriving from older versions of OFF and being perpetually repeated.

 

The tighter turn is from 2 things:

 

1. the reduced loaded weight to 914.5kg

 

2. A more efficient L/Dmax compared to the default.  The CLmax on the default Albatros is also very low, which is what made me suspicious.  The CLmax of the Goettingen 174 airfoil is publicly available data, around 1.41.  The CLmax of the WOFF Albatros D.Va is only 1.14.  I don't know if that was a typo or not, but it is similar for all of the Albatros scouts, so it seems not to have been a mistake.

 

I don't think the turn is excessively good, however.  Just yesterday I found it a chore to keep up with a Spad 7 in a flat turn, and then the AI Spad I was chasing entered a climbing turn that I could not follow.  As always, more feedback is welcome.

 

-----------------

 

When I have more time I'll post a jsgme of the FMs I have adjusted and find satisfying.

 

 

I hope you'll expand your research-fine tunning to other planes too.

[Olham 164]

Did anyone cast an eye on the AI behaviour, when using an FM mod?

Did they still behave well, and could they still achieve anything?

[+gavagai 0]

Olham,

 

The AI behavior seems OK.  No crashing during takeoff or landing.  I did see a collision during normal navigation, but that happened now and then with the default FMs, too (I am a terrible flight leader I guess).

 

In dogfights the AI does fine.  However, some of its defensive maneuvers are more limited because it can no longer use the rudder to yaw so wildly. 

[Olham 164]

Okay, thank you, gavagai.

Next weekend I may be able to test both the D.V and D.Va mods.

Until then I will fly both aircraft as vanilla FMs, to get a feel for the default ones.

I never flew the D.Va much even in OFF - never lived that long.

Edited March 4, 2014 by Olham

[Adger 85]

Olham,

 

The AI behavior seems OK.  No crashing during takeoff or landing.  I did see a collision during normal navigation, but that happened now and then with the default FMs, too (I am a terrible flight leader I guess).

 

In dogfights the AI does fine.  However, some of its defensive maneuvers are more limited because it can no longer use the rudder to yaw so wildly. 

 

 

 

Just wanted to add that ive done 5 campaign missions using Gav,s FM and everything's running how it should,Takeoffs and landings are fine,AI seems fine...Have you thought of approaching Pol,or Winder Gav? and seeing if you can put a JSGME version of your FM,s over at Sim hq? I cant see this being a problem as there are other mods that change the sim (Aris clouds mod,77-scouts news mod Etc) then people can choose to use or not use them.Just a thought Bud.You could add them here aswell the only reason i mentioned Sim hq is because i believe that there are people over there that dont know about Combat aces OFF\WOFF forum and so would miss out.

Edited March 4, 2014 by Adger

[+Polovski 458]

Regarding FM changes, you can do a lot to the FMs and the AI will still fly fine.  The warnings against doing this seem like a bit of a red herring.

 

Now, for horse power, changing it does nothing (same is true of RPM).  Aircraft performance in WOFF seems to be a function of the max sea level airspeed, the weight, and the LDmax (lift/drag). "170hp" is just a generic designation for the Mercedes D.III power output in the Albatros D.III or D.V.  Primary sources indicate 175 PS @1450 rpm, with the max rpm in level flight at around 1500 rpm.

 

Now, regarding weight, there is a Windsock document that has the OAW Albatros D.Va coming in at over 950kg.  We also have a primary source that says 914.5kg.  So, I went with the primary source for my WOFF FM.  That same Windsock document doesn't convert correctly between metric and imperial units, fwiw.  They say 5km = 15250ft.

 

The other big difference you can feel in the FM I made is the rudder response.  No more hockey skids to the point of flying sideways through the air.  I also reduced the roll rate slightly to feel more like the Rise of Flight Albatros D.III.  Every account I have read of the Albatros describes mediocre roll performance, and with all the subjectivity that comes along with it, it seemed appropriate to make that change.

 

Incidentally, the WOFF FM leaves out the 2 degrees of lower wing dihedral in the Albatros V strutters.  I was very surprised that they missed this.

 

-------------------

 

Now, having argued myself silly at the Rise of Flight forums over the Albatros airspeed, it is great that I can finally tinker with the FM in a WW1 flight sim.  However, WOFF is not free of the same problems.  Just like Rise of Flight, the Entente rotary scouts are pretty fast.  118.5mph for the Camel, 110mph for the Nieuport 17, 116mph for the Nieuport 24, etc.  As Pat Wilson says, FMs will never be perfect, but they shouldn't be obviously wrong.  The idea is to make the relative performance of the aircraft credible.  So, one of the first things I did was to slow down the rotary scouts (including the Dr1, ahem).  For example, all of the more detailed sources have a max airspeed of about 107mph for the Nieuport 24, but there is one figure out there that says 116mph and WOFF went with that one.  That ends of skewing the whole balance in 1917 when your Albatros is slower than 116mph.

 

Just to clarify some things.

 

Adding 2 degrees to the lower wing will not achieve what you think it will. We missed it because it will make no real difference in sim.  The *.xfm txt file does part of the job - RexH's code interprets the data as required by the sim.

For example the Gyro makes little difference to inline engines as he deals with it differently.

 

Regarding breaking AI - it's not a red herring, we do not make daft statements for no reason .  The AI are trained on every FM.  RexH designed the AI and new FM changes so he should know.  AI may break at various places, including when damaged, altitude, different formations or in rare situations etc, odd manoeuvres or other strange behaviour. The fact it's OK well lucky :)

 

Just because some sources say x and 1 says y doesn't make the 1 wrong obviously but I am not going to get into a debate - also sometimes we chose to go various for all sorts of reasons, or because it makes sense to the AI or other reasons.

The Merc engine was upgraded and improved all along for sure, we do not have many variants of each craft unfortunately.

 

For every stat one way there are others another way, we think the balance is pretty good but yes you may not.

Edited March 5, 2014 by Polovski

[Adger 85]

AHH FM,s the bane of all flight sim discussions..Nice post IMO Pol it lets us at least know about a Developers side of things..I think at least whats important to ME is the comments regarding The AI are trained on EVERY fm and That Rex Hanover designed the FM and AI so he should know.. and also the the AI May break in places (damaged,rare situations,Etc) just about nails my decision to Keep flying with Vanilla WOFF fm,s at this time..IM not going to lie I did see a difference in Gavagai,s DVa FM,and i did like it..especially the Rudder turns..But I also believe that if Yourself,Winder and Rex believe that there,s something that,s drastically wrong with ANY fm,you would en devour to Fix it..Cheers

[rjw 48]

AHH FM,s the bane of all flight sim discussions..Nice post IMO Pol it lets us at least know about a Developers side of things..I think at least whats important to ME is the comments regarding The AI are trained on EVERY fm and That Rex Hanover designed the FM and AI so he should know.. and also the the AI May break in places (damaged,rare situations,Etc) just about nails my decision to Keep flying with Vanilla WOFF fm,s at this time..IM not going to lie I did see a difference in Gavagai,s DVa FM,and i did like it..especially the Rudder turns..But I also believe that if Yourself,Winder and Rex believe that there,s something that,s drastically wrong with ANY fm,you would en devour to Fix it..Cheers

 

Adger;

 

What  I find interesting through all of this discussion and playing with the FM's is that we all come at it with differing opinions as to "what should be", but none of us are definitive experts basing our opinions on actual flight experience with the crafts in question. Therefore our opinions are only subjective.

 

I agree with you that the Devs will ultimately make changes to the FM's if they can do so and if it is deemed warranted.

 

This discussion thread and the modification of FM's is valuable for critiquing and analysis and may focus the devs attention to looking more closely to determine if changes are warranted.

 

I am happy to have followed this thread as it has allowed me to learn a considerable amount about FM's and how they work and having Pol give a discourse on it as well is very useful in helping me understand how things are integrated in WOFF.

 

Best Regards;

 

 

[rjw 48]

Just to clarify some things.

 

Adding 2 degrees to the lower wing will not achieve what you think it will. We missed it because it will make no real difference in sim.  The *.xfm txt file does part of the job - RexH's code interprets the data as required by the sim.

For example the Gyro makes little difference to inline engines as he deals with it differently.

 

Regarding breaking AI - it's not a red herring, we do not make daft statements for no reason .  The AI are trained on every FM.  RexH designed the AI and new FM changes so he should know.  AI may break at various places, including when damaged, altitude, different formations or in rare situations etc, odd manoeuvres or other strange behaviour. The fact it's OK well lucky :)

 

Just because some sources say x and 1 says y doesn't make the 1 wrong obviously but I am not going to get into a debate - also sometimes we chose to go various for all sorts of reasons, or because it makes sense to the AI or other reasons.

The Merc engine was upgraded and improved all along for sure, we do not have many variants of each craft unfortunately.

 

For every stat one way there are others another way, we think the balance is pretty good but yes you may not.

 

Hi Pol;

 

Thanks for the generic discourse on the whys and wherfores that affected the decision making process for your FM's. I appreciate it because it gives me a deeper understanding of what your folks had to do to get where we are with WOFF, and just how intricate and interlinked the AI logic is to the FM's. I always thought they were separate and independant.

 

Now what I am going to say is not a criticism of how things are or a request to make a change, but just an observation I have made in testing Gavagai's FM against the stock FM.

 

I noted that flying the stock FM in spot view while approaching to land, it was impossible for me to put the DVa into a side slip.  I was able to do it quite successfully with Gavagai's FM.

I recognize that I do not have any technical knowledge to validate whether the DVa could actually do a side slip, but I suspect it would have been possible. That said, I am not asking for a change to the stock FM, just making an observation to report back to the devs in case it is something they may not be aware of or could benefit from.

 

Best Regards to you all and keep up the great support. You guys are the best!

Edited March 5, 2014 by rjw