Mr. Lucky

Damn! You guys are good!

Okay...follow up. I had set my sector activity to 'active' when it should've been 'quiet'. Can I change it? I haven't seen an option in OFFbase. Do I need to worry about it? What can I / should I do? Thanks

Hello Mr.Lucky, if it says that there is activity elsewhere but not in your area, then you are in a Quiet sector.

 

Bletchley

Thank you. Now...onward and upward.

Quick Question:

I got the whole package up and running with minimal difficulty (OFFice and the listed mods). When filling in the squadron info, I was unable to find in OFF anything concrete about the activity in my sector. I'm in RFC 29 in early 1916. The description mentions activity in Verdun but not in our sector. So I gleaned it to be active but it didn't definitively say what it was like it did for the squadron operational rating. Did I miss it somewhere? Thanks. BTW, got me back in the spirit of flying OFF after a many month hiatus. When the smoke clears, has anyone thought of outside interaction like trips to town, courtships, etc?

Did anyone notice the fully spinning rotary engine now? Fantastic work.

Those are bell cranks that deliver motion to torque tubes that travel through the wing and actuate the ailerons.

I've been flying OFF since Phase I first came out. I've avoided ROF mostly because of the online requirement and lack of career as well as few airplanes. I've been flying it recently though. ROF now has a career mode built in and Patrick Wilson's campaign generator lets you fly in career mode without being online. I also took advantage of the Christmas sale to build up a fleet of airplanes that hold my interest.

Most of what I had to say between the two has already been said and I don't want to write an exhaustive disertation comparing the two. Like most here, OFF is my first love. I am SOOO eagerly anticipating P4 but here are a couple things that I will comment on.

Career: There is so much to like about OFF's career but some features that ROF do not have is a career range from 1915 to 1918. ROF only goes to 1916 and some of the aircraft early deployments aren't selectable. i.e. Lafayette Eascadrille, N11. PW's generator does let you go earlier and I was able to massage the data files to have a truly American Escadrille. Both ROF career options do not have different ranks for the RNAS. IRC, OFF does for P3 already. Now, one thing I like about ROF's career is the whole day's schedule to process through, so I get a feeling of inclusion seeing the other pilots assigned to other sorties and waiting my turn. I have a feeling of disconnect with PW's generator and not so much, but still somewhat with OFF's.

Gameplay. I like flying the planes in ROF because of the mechanics.I like the starting sequence, more controls like radiator shutters, the different rotary engines (some with throttle, some without). Perhaps the FM but I'm not sure. I don't care about the machine guns, because when I'm firing them, I don't even see the hammers, my focus is on the target. The externals (not skins!) I think are better than OFF and certainly better than they used to be. Especially prop speeds and rotating engines. I also think the visibility in ROF is better, I don't seem to have so much difficulty seeing between the wings or over the MG's so I seem to have better situational awareness esp. in the N11. But a lot of times, adjusting for the best visibility puts the pilot out of line with the gun sights. I like the cockpits in OFF but there are a couple things that grate my nerves. The padded MG's in Sopwith's (can't see S#$%@ around them), the windscreens on N11's (I'd cut that off on the first flight), and the elephantine headrest on the early SE5A. Both suffer from the problem of keeping up with friendly AI flight members on missions. I fly with realistic engine options which make it almost impossible to keep up with your flight.

Scenery. Over all I like OFF better, but the individual objects, I like ROF better. Also, niggling detail, but the cities in OFF seldom are where they're supposed to be, like the town being to one side or the other by a couple miles of the nexus of roads that should be in the city center. OFF has a much larger flight world and many, many other plusses, too many to list here. OFF roads, railroads, rivers are easier to spot from altitude making navigation easier. It's tough in ROF unless you can see a river.

Like most here, I like both for different aspects. I know the shirt comings I feel are in OFF are mostly due to the engine and if at all possible, the dev's can and will improve upon it. They've already made HUGE leaps since Phase I. Besides most of what's mentioned here already, in OFF , I'd like to see a more inclusive (not immersive) feeling in the career interface. I can't quite put my finger on how or what, but I think ROF's career get's me closer at this point. I'd like to see more early planes to flesh out the 1915 - 1916 years like Farmans, Vickers, Moraine's etc. I get tired of seeing only N11's flying my EIII in Jasta 6.

For ROF, I'd say more scope in the career mode and less certainty about the ending. i.e. kills, pilot death, etc. Scenery could use some work as well as a greater scope in aircraft deployment and availability. I think the ROF developers are trying to improve their sim, and doing a fair job, but working on a Personal Package instead of other improvements, seems to show a lack of authenticity perspective as well as a disconnnect from the community, IMHO.

I expect great things from P4 and OFF (they've set the bar pretty high) and am eagerly awaiting it's delivery. If they ever got hold of a newer, better engine, my God it'll be beautiful! I also expect great things from ROF (eventually) after they wander around for a while, but both hold a place in my stable. Now I also have to find time to do the Korean War with the UP3.0 mod to IL2. So my fav arenas (WWI and Korea) are now covered....where do I find the time?

I;ve been doing something like this for quite a while. Knowing that squadrons usually operated in their own sectors, I kept selecting alternate objectives until I got a sensible one. I also never fly using waypoints, I always navigate by map. So, I'd mark out the flight path on the map, and in the case of a patrol, I would patrol the area for a set length of time, usually 15 to 20 minutes, back and forth, then head back if no encounters. Of course I always return after any combat, not being sure how much ammo I have left or what damage taken. The improvements in P4 would be most welcome for all this.

The problem I have with the AI this way, is you can't develop techniques using the strength, or staying away from, the weaknesses of your aircraft. All you have is cunning and skill. That would be enough, all factors being equal but when all your wingmen are shot down and there are still 7 enemy out there....you may need to run and there's no way a DR1 should be able to close the range on me in a spadXIII in a full throttle screaming dive. Yet, it happens. As mentioned above, you're only hope for escape is to get low before they destroy you and hedgehop all the way home. And, of course, those dead eye ground gunners only work for the enemy; drag an enemy fighter over a friendly airbase and you'll grow old watching them try (or not) to shoot him down while he provides a superb aerial exhibition for all the airbase personnel.

I use Encarta maps as mentioned in the stickies. They're 99% accurate with the terrain and scenery in OFF. RR's, roads, rivers are spot on. OF course, you'll have to note where the airdromes are yourself. Also, the items on the briefing maps are off about 4 miles to the southwest when comparing to paper maps and in-game scenery. Landmarks become more critical when flying for the French and US when there are no compasses.

I have found, due to their weight, the inline planes need a fair amount of nose down to keep the airspeed up compared to their weight which requires a significant flare before touching down. Power on landings are a breeze though.

Rotaries tend to float and even fly in ground affect at idle. I took a page out of a book I read (one of Lewis' I think?) and switch the engine off on final when the airfield is made and set them down nicely for a three point full stall landing.

I'm with Beard. I like them, but voted NO because in some planes

they block an instrument or compass or other controls which I use.

Hey Olham, I used to fly gas or glow engines too. I always wanted to try electrics but too inefficient and expensive, but now, they've made great strides in the technology, especially in batteries. Now you can 12 minute flight times on a Lithium Poly battery pack which is close to what you got on fuel and that's plenty of time in the air or you'll get a stiff neck. They've made progress in motors too so the whole system is light enough to power almost any kit or scratch model. Plus, since there's almost no vibration, the airframe doesn't need to be as heavy. And...there's no mess to clean up, not much noise and you don't spend all day trying to start the engine instead of flying. I relish the advancements in electric power systems and highly recommend flying RC electric. The model shown cost me about 200.00 U.S. in the kit and components. It could've been about 100.00 more but I already had a transmitter and receiver. If you want more info, I'd recommend going to www.towerhobbies.com and go from there. The Piper Cub and Albatross were both gas models that I am converting to electric. Sorry to hi jack the thread just wanted to share info. Correction...it's a DII not a DV.

Wow, Mr.Lucky - that's a nice model!

When I see a good looking RC model, I always wonder, how people dare to fly them.

A Nupe must be quite tricky to operate?

That's not a Guillows kit. It's a 35.5 inch wingspan, ARF (almost ready to fly) kit by Electrifly which I wanted to try. They have several WWI airplanes; DVII, DR1, Spad XXIII, N11, Sop Camel, SE5A.

I appreciate the compliment, Olham, but since it is ARF, I can't take the credit or the blame (I would've done a better job covering the fuselage). As far as flying, I always take a nice photo before the first flight. I learned long ago that if you're going to fly models, you haveto be prepared to crash them. All crashes aren't fatal though, and I have 1 or 2 models that have crashed, been repaired and fly to this day. As I said, I wante dto try this plane and see how it flew. Otherwise, I prefer built up kits which have more detail and take more time, but I also enjoy building. I have avery nice Alb DV I will start as soon as I finish a Piper Cub my Dad started.

As they say, timing is everything. Just finishing up this model.

That rear gunner has come in handy when you run out of ammo. I keep flying so as to give him a good shot and fairly often, he'll put down a few of the enemy. Sometimes you can't get him to shoot at all.

Ras,

Managed to get some Stearman time myself a couple years back while getting my tailwheel endorsement. It's a wonderful experience. I'd been to the airfield you mentioned in Idaho and even offered a job there but I was 17 and from Ohio so it wasn't feasible. The place burned down a while ago, don't know how many years. Another tragic loss.

Got it. Thanks, I didn't go deep enough. The wording of the link made me think it only held the updates.

Does anyone know what happened to the screen savers or wallpapers that you could get from the OFF website? If they're gone from there permanently, does anyone know where else they may be hosted? Thanks

Widowmaker in top-form again! But you're right, greed is definitely a major factor.

 

Greed, and the fact that it doesn't seem to be quenchable for so many of these diggers.

I wish, they could really find peace and enjoyment in something, love for something or

someone. Then it would be enough to have a wife and kids, a home, a garden, a car or

motorbike, or maybe even both, that's okay still - and something like "Over Flanders fields"

 

What I mean is - greed seems to be the desperate attempt to fill a hole inside you, were

the love should be.

It's because they want what everyone wants. HAPPINESS. But they never get it because they don't realize that those things: millions, big houses, etc. don't make you happy. You need to find happiness first. Then they can experience life from that vantage point and this infectious greed goes away. (In the best of all possible worlds). But, this greed is drummed into us from conception. Because of that greed and more, we are taught. bombarded, brain washed that we must have these these things or our lives are meaningless. How many kids do you see starting out anting the 350,000 house that they'll pay three times that amount for over the life of the mortgage? It's a vicious cycle that can't be stopped unless by catastrophic means because it's too endemic. One of the great things about this country is what I did, which, if I were a young kid I'd do over.I bought a small piece of cheap land and built my own small house. All for less than 25,000. If I need more room, I can add on. But, most importantly, I satisfied a basic human need without lining the pockets of a greedy 'suit' so he can have a 5 million dollar birthday party. The establishment has us in it's grips from the beginning, takes away our self-reliance and laughs while we joyously dance our way into their economic prisons.

Fortiesboy is partially right. What he left out is that the home shouldn't cost 350,000 to begin with. Theses 'economists' scratch their heads and run models but can't realize that when the cost of basic necessities is driven extremely high outside of market forces like housing, food, utilities and fuel, then there's no sustaining foundation and things will collapse. We can only hope that a movement develops over the generations where the people become more self-reliant, a 'black market' system grows to undermine the current economic machine and the governments are forced to get their tendrils out of our lives and do what they are mandated to do by the people.

Now that we're back on damage, there is one thing I really hate. If I have a damaged wingtip, and make a good landing when I finally roll to a stop, the plane rolls over and crashes as though I rolled off a cliff. I don't mean the wing dug in as might happen, but the airplane actually rolls over and the wings break off. kind of like the guy in the yellow rain coat on the tricycle from Laugh In (for the Americans). That is the only time I resurrect (or nullify the death of) a pilot. That is the only crash and burn that I can exactly attribute to a design flaw in CFS3 and not the fortunes of war so I feel it is justified.

It's been my observation that it's not a liberal or 'right wing' issue. It's a problem of producers and non-producers. It's a problem in all countries all over the world made even worse by the speed and depth of communication inter twining the countries together. There are two groups of entities: those who create wealth while not providing anything of value. Then there are those who take from the producers and give to the non producers . Both groups are increasing in number and throwing the economic balance off kilter. I honestly think we need this economic down turn to collapse and cleanse the system so balance can be restored but it won't be pretty and it's the producers who will suffer first before it get's better, as we're seeing. Read 'Atlas Shrugged' by Ayn Rand. It was written @ 75 years ago and it fits any time period.

As for news, I'm like most here it seems. I don't watch it, I don't read it, I don;t need it. In this day and age of inundation, I am selective about what information I want.

Many good points have been made here. I may try some experimentation combining these ideas with some tempering. The mission results allow that you can assign the pilots in your flights a numeric order and apply them to the numeric order in the mission review as they are in numerical order even though hex. We know that sometimes even though a plane goes down or is destroyed, it doesn't necessarily require the demise of the pilot, so that can be applied by a die roll and delayed return based on distance from the base. Same for behind enemy lines...die roll ...KIA,Captured, or escaped with an appropriate delay. With that I might even overwrite my wingman going on leave every other week. It is still possible that you might be short handed enough that that some missions might be scrubbed. Also, if multiple missions are flown per day, what about pilot fatigue? You could also correct pilots being killed when you saw them return to base with you. Now, if you wanted to take it a step further, you could do the same with airplanes, but destroyed is destroyed and down behind enemy lines is lost. You would quickly run out of planes though, so that might not be feasible.

Damage is alive and well. I had a collision in my N17 and the lower wingtip was chewed up. Explosions are there as I lured an enemy over AA guns, he flew through a stream of lead and exploded. Fell like a lead balloon on fire as he had no wings. Also, I set one enemy alight and saw the pilot bail out (I believe it was the pilot) who was also on fire.

Google maps...no. MS Encarta...yes. I posted a lengthy diatribe years ago on accurate maps particularly in the Vosges region. It's in the stickies where UncleAl quotes it.

A couple things I'd like:

Involves a sort of question first. Flying for 56 squadron, for example, all the planes in my flight have the letter 'B'. I'd thought that each plane had it's own letter, or are they all 'B'because its B flight?

If each plane had it's own letter...it at least has it's own serial no.

I would like to see a squadron CO or admin function either a setting in workshop or a setting plus rank achievement.

As such, you could assign the pilots to the flights and the pilots to their aircraft.

I'm relatively certain, that the devs can do that along with better tracking of the disposition of each aircraft and pilot after the mission. In Mission Review, you can see that each plane is assigned an ID in game. I feel certain that can be translated to what I would like to see. One could even be concerned with fuel and ammo supplies, maintenance. replacements, etc.