Jump to content

Mr. Lucky

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Mr. Lucky

Profile Information

  • Gender
  1. OFFbase: the Barmy Automated Squadron Experience for OFF

    Damn! You guys are good!
  2. OFFbase: the Barmy Automated Squadron Experience for OFF

    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
  3. OFFbase: the Barmy Automated Squadron Experience for OFF

    Thank you. Now...onward and upward.
  4. OFFbase: the Barmy Automated Squadron Experience for OFF

    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?
  5. Did anyone notice the fully spinning rotary engine now? Fantastic work.
  6. Handles on Nieuport wings?

    Those are bell cranks that deliver motion to torque tubes that travel through the wing and actuate the ailerons.
  7. 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?
  8. 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.
  9. Have we figured this out?

    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.
  10. A few OFF questions…

    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.
  11. In Cockpit Pilots

    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.
  12. 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.
  13. 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.
  14. As they say, timing is everything. Just finishing up this model.
  15. 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.

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..