Hoghead

OvS My understanding was what made a Nieuport a Bis version was the rounded fuse. However doing some research it seems to mean it was a second version of the original. Additionally it seems that the original version of the N24 had the rounded fuse as did the Bis variant. So in the case of the N24 both versions should have the rounded fuse. Learn something new everyday.

Now Winder ya see..., That's why you guys at OBD are never going to be big time. Any software developer worth a tinker's damn knows that the answer to "when is it going to be available" is 2 weeks ! Seriously though the planes look good and the other features should a make OFF even better. I do have one question though, In the pictures of the N24 it seems to have the rounded fuse just like the N24 bis. Shouldn't the N24 have the flat sided fuse like the N17? Scott "Hoghead" Dean

I've always liked the rounded tail feathers of the 24. Looking forward to the addon. Scott "Hoghead" Dean

Sah Weeeeet

Well looks like things are getting underway. I'm not going to start until I receive my Trackir which is scheduled to arrive today. I'm sure I'm going to need a day or two to get is set up and working as I want so it may be a couple of days before my first sortie. Olhman has created a single thread for the Hun to post their reports to, have we done the same for our side and if so could someone link it please. While it seems most of us have created a custom skin for their plane, I've never bothered to learn how. If anyone would be willing to create one for me I'd sure appreciate it. Scott "Hoghead" Dean

Wow, It's really amazing how diverse everyone's work history has been. In a group like this which tends to be a little older I figured most would respond something like "I graduated from high school/college, went to work for xyz for 25+ years and retired." As for myself after graduating high school I attended Universal Technical Institute for automotive repair as I had always enjoyed working on my and my friend's cars. After a year of working on Mom's grocery getters I realized there was a huge difference between working on 500 horsepower street rods and the family station wagon. Joined the Navy and wound up spending 24 years in submarines. After retiring with absolutely no idea what I wanted to do when I grew up, I stumbled upon the Union Pacific Railroad website. I filled out an online application and after a couple years working as a freight conductor I took promotion to engine service. For the last three years I've been working as a through freight engineer. Just like every other red blooded American kid at some point I wanted to be an train engineer and now I are one. Scott "Hoghead" Dean

Flying for the Brits is fine with me, where ever you need me works. Scott "Hoghead" Dean

Hi all, Just came across this thread today as I've been away from OFF for awhile. I lost interest mainly due to the lousy view system but I just ordered my Trackir 5 and it shipped today, should have in a few days. Anyway I was wondering if I could still get in on this sounds fun. Thanks, Scott Dean

Hey everyone, I'm surprised no one has mentioned the one thing that I think hampers OFF/CFS3 the most. I was never a member of the CFS community but I'd be willing to bet that one of the things that really affected CFS acceptance with the flight sim crowd was it's horrible view system. The nine view system has been a standard for years, without it any flight sim is doomed from the get go. Unfortunatly OFF suffers from this problem because it's based on the CFS engine. In addition to all the other things that have been mentioned, the fact that to really get the most out of OFF requires the purchase of a TrackIR system, is something most won't consider. I've been flying OFF (Phase II and III) using padlock to get around the view system but I don't really like it. I have TrackIR on my birthday wish list so hopefully soon I can give up the crutch. As far as Phase 4 is concerned, unless you guys can get your own engine or use a more capable one like IL2's I wouldn't even bother. To much work for to little return with CFS as the base engine. That being said I would gladly purchase any additional add ons, especially the one that fill in the gaps that already exist. Scott

I managed to get a pilot to survive long enough to actually get some kills confirmed, and get a medal. Problem is if you look in the log book it says Confirmed kills 7, but on the claims side it only shows two claim forms confirmed for a total of 5 aircraft (3 Sopwith Tripes and 2 Nieuport 17s) Although you can't see all the claim reports the others show pending. The top claim still shows pending but it's the only other claim I have for two aircraft (would make the total 7) Devs any ideas? Thanks, Scott

Punt

Olham, That's funny because I've found the Halberstadt to be the best early German scout of the bunch. Even better than the Alb DII and III. The poor forward view and the only one machine gun are the only problems with it I can find. Scott

I've been noticing that often the number of missions flown doesn't correspond with the actual missions my pilot has flown. See the attached screen shot. In this case my pilot has flown 4 missions as the entries indicate yet next to the missions flown line it shows 7. I went into the log file in the campaign folder and it shows 4. Scott

Well that answers that I guess. I have campaign only selected in workshops and thought that would ensure that even the number of flights would only be those logged in campaign. Oh well thanks for the info. Scott

You didn't run out of ammo your guns jammed. If your guns jam they will often "reset" themselves after awhile. I'm guessing this is a simulation of them jamming because they got to hot, then function returning after they cool off. Scott

WF2 Great videos, thanks for sharing. Those pre WWI planes are something to see in the air. Scott

Winder, I think it's incorrect to say that many folks don't like the claim system. I think most do, it just they are not sure of the mechanics and so are not sure why the game does some of the things it does. See my post http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?showtopic=38202 I think if you could make a few small tweeks (although I'm not sure what is possible given the limitations of CFS3) everyone that wants to take the time to fill out the full claim form would be very happy with it. Sure some just don't want to take the time and that's fine, you've made arrangements for them in the workshop. I think you guys have done a wonderful job with OFF and I can understand if you've decided that you've spent as much time on it as your willing to. There are a couple of more small things I'd like to see fixed, for instance, if we could just get the cities in the ingame map to match their actual locations in the game, that would be great. Again I understand if you've had enough, I get the same way with my R/C airplanes, at some point I say enough is enough I just want to go out and fly it. Thanks for all your hard work, you guys have indeed turned a pig's ear into a silk purse, I'd love to see what you guys could do with your own engine without the limitations of CFS3. Thanks, Scott

Is there a workshop setting that affects this? The allied archie is black for me. Scott

Seems I get this whenever I put in a claim for a plane that may have been shot or shot at by another of the squad. For instance I just had a flight where I pasted a Spad XIII and he fell, but with that nose up wings level straight down fall. I came around again and dove on him and just pounded him from about 75 yards down to smell the pilot's fear range. I could see some tracers coming in from below my aircraft and I'm sure one of my flight was trying to poach one of my kills again. Now I'm sure the game decided that he killed the Spad and so generated the erroneous claim alert, now I don't know what the game uses for criteria for awarding the kill if the target was hit by more than one pilot, but I should be allowed to submit the claim because in reality I would assume that I shot him down. Now if the game decides to award the kill to the other guy that's fine, but I should be allowed to submit the claim. Additionally would it be possible to be awarded only part of number of planes claimed. I often will submit a claim for lets say two or three aircraft on one claim. These are either all awarded or all rejected. It would be nice if only some of the planes claimed were either awarded or rejected. Thanks, Scott

(1) Since 1.28 seems my wingmen are back to lagging below if I try anything but a slow gentle climb, makes getting above the enemy very difficult. (2) I think the drag values on the Sopwith Pup need looking at. Pull the power off, roll over into a dive and speed shoots up immediately to about 230 knots and it starts the shake rattle and roll thing. Even a shallow dive with power on will cause the same thing. Thanks, Scott

Olham, Yep even when I hit "R" they lag. I know it's because they won't climb below a certain speed. Once speed drops off below a certain value the AI will reduce it's climb to maintain a minimum air speed even though they are still way above stall speed. If I warp for just a second they are magically moved back into position but if I keep climbing briskly they'll fall below again. Geier, Seems to be both the Pup and the Sopwith Triplane. The Camels, Se5s, and the DR1s seem ok, that's all I've had time to fly since ver 1.28. I don't know if the low drag, over speed thing with the Pup is new, I think this is the first time I've flown it since ver 1.25. Scott

I downloaded and installed ver. 1.28 and now my flight lags below me if I try any kind of climb other than a real shallow one. Makes it kinda hard to get above the enemy. Scott

WF2 First I'd have to get my pilots license, I've always wanted to but the cost prevented me in the past. Now I can afford it but don't have the time. However if I were going to do it I'd do it full scale. Like I said it would see to me that the Bebe would be in the same realm cost and construction difficulty wise as most of the kit planes currently available. I'm guessing though that there would be no kit available and so would have to be built from plans. Seems the Fokker DVII would be a good candidate also. Steel tube construction (no cabinet makers level wood working skills necessary) Wings could be done with modern components ie aluminum spars and ribs again eliminating wood working skills. Additionally I would think there would be a number of light weight inline engines that could be used for a power plant. As for the rotories are these reproductions of the originals or redesigned engines that just happen to be rotories? Other than the total loss oil system, I'd think a user friendly rotory would be very possible with fuel injection and electronic ignition systems. I'm just musing mind you. I do a lot of R/C modeling and today you can purchase working turbine jet engines for R/C planes along with working rotory radials. Scott

Thanks for sharing WF2, I've never really understood though, why if your going to go to all the time, trouble and expense to build a WWI type airplane why you would do one of the 3/4 or 7/8 scale ones? If I were going to do it I'd do it full size. I'm thinking a full size Nieuport 11 would be a perfect subject for the home builder. The other thing I've always thought odd of the home built crowd is that no one has come up with a modern, reliable rotory engine. I would think that with modern machining equipment and material one could be built that would be reliable and affordable. I think you could use a splash type electronic fuel injection with a throttle body that would allow you to have a working throttle (vice having to rely on a blip button for speed control). Sleeved aluminum cylinders and an aluminum crankcase would keep weight and gyroscopic procession down. You'd still need to have a total loss oil system but with modern lubricants at least you could use one that wouldn't make the pilot sick Just seeing even the small scale home built planes with VW engines in them just looks wrong. Scott

If I had one thing that I had to say bothers me the most about OFF, it would be the fact that the AI does not have to adhere to the same laws of physics and aerodynamics that the player does. Having said that, the flip side of the coin would be that if they did you'd be racking up 10 kills a sortie. Unfortunately AI technology still is still many many years from being on a par with the human player. That's one of the reason multiplayer is so much more popular than single player games for most people. I would still like to see OBD take a look at all the early aircraft, the EIII, DH-2 and also even the Alb DII specifically. I'd really like to see these planes become more viable at least in their time frame. Scott