77Scout

Thanks Guys!! I am off to get it.

Wow, very good work. I wish I had a tenth of that kind of artistic talent.

The wind can either be an advantage or a disadvantage...just depends what direction you are flying. AFAIK the AI bullets are just the same as the players; they do not have any extra destructive force. I personally don't see the AI planes having a big advantage over the players, but would be interested to know definitively if the player and AI Flight Models are actually the same or different.

The bomber escort problem seems to result because the bombers head to the target fairly early in the mission (after about one lap of the field), while your flight burns up time doing the standard two laps around the field. By the time your flight leader heads off on the actual mission the bombers are miles ahead and you never catch up. On bomber escort missions I leave my flight to their 'lapsof the field' and hook up with the bombers right away. I am usually the only fighter escort they have, and we leave my flight far behind never to be seen again. Solution might be to have flights only circle the field once rather than twice? BTW, Escort works perfectly when you fly in the two-seater flight; the escort stays with you all the way. Wonder why it doesn't work so well when you are with the escorting flight.

Very nice. It will great to be able to find these by following the tracks. Another jump in reality/immersion. Nice work guys!!

I had this once. Warp took me way off to the northeast in just the same manner. Fortunately I was German :) Happened on a bomber escort mission also. The bombers were just flying around and around at the meeting point (Waypoint A). Now I generally never use warp, but eventually I got tired of flying around and around waiting so I finally hit warp. Boom...I was gone to the ends of the map. Hmmmm

I am no historian but agree they seem to blow up too easily compared to what I know of the real thing. Its been like that since the beginning. Someone posted instructions a while back to edit the obs_balloon files in the vehicles folder to 'up' the damage threshhold. Have not tried it yet. This would be a very easy patch, providing the change gives a more realistic effect, which I assume it would be. Phase 4?

Yeh, the AI sometimes fly poorly at ground level, and unfortunately when in a fight they often seem to instinctively dive down to ground level in short order (not always but quite often). The AI flying at ground level seems to have a couple of ideas that conflict with one another and start that hammerhead stall cycle. a) I am near the ground so I must exchange speed for height and do a panic zoom-climb. b) I am going too slow so I must exchange height for speed and dive. which sometimes repeats a, b, a, b etc until they eventually fall tail-first into the ground. I have no idea if this is really what is going on inside the AI, just my guess. I am sure this behaviour is not easy to change without access to the CSF3 hardcoded AI logic, but then again things have already been greatly improved by the teams efforts with the FMs (e.g. Nieuports are much better down low than in the past, etc.).

Wow!! Arma II looks amazing...great visually and a full range of freedom of movement. I think I need to order this for some entertainment this winter. I see a WW2 mod is coming out; that would really be up my alley.

Thanks guys. I am convinced...going to install version 5 software now. Bigfish2...Arma2 sounds interesting. Is it variable with good replay value like OFF, or just a bunch of scripted scenarios that you play a couple of times then chuck the game in the trash after a few weeks?

Probably none of my business, and just a suggestion, but it might be best to make clear where the main pictures came from and give the artist (is it Mark Miller?) proper credit. Some people seem to think the artwork is you original creation but its not, am I right?. I'll butt out now....

Can those of you who have updated the software to Ver.5 give a bit more feedback now that you have used it for awhile. Is it worth the switch? My Trackir 4 seems to be working fine with the old software, so I am hesitant to mess with it. So is the '5' software it noticeably better for OFF? Any downside? (I don't really care about the utilites...rarely need to use them and the old versions do fine anyway) Thanks!!

Ohhh Kaaayyy...someones having a bad day. Moving on... Winder has posted that he likes people throwing out ideas for Phase 4. Good for you Dej, this seems like a pretty good one to me. If unpredictability of medals was how it was in real life then I bet that is how we might eventually see it in OFF, knowing Winders typical way of doing things.

Yep, it is possible, but simply think what kind of programming would be required. If you have ever done programming then it will be seen as quite unlikely. Not saying Winder couldn't write this kind of code if he had enless amounts of time, but I am pretty sure he didn't have the hunderds of hours available to do it. I am betting the claims algorythm is something rather simple with a semi-large random component at its core, but of course I really don't know.

Not a problem in WW1...none of us have brakes :)

Oh well, that seems to shoot down my two-word single witness theory; DOH! Hmmmmm. The more I see of what people are putting into their claim reports, the less I see any pattern to successfully getting confirmations. Multiple witnesses is obviously nothing to do with it as Macklroy gets 80% and Olham gets 25%. Long writeup versus short writeup seems to make no difference either. Yet maybe someday we will crack this DaWinder Code :) BTW, I still refuse to buy into the theory that there is some fancy text-parsing algorythm working here that actually understands even 5% of what people are writing about altitudes, locations etc. The artificial intelligence coding required to accomplish that would take decades to write...seriously. More likely a few 'magic words' might be looked for, like 'flames', 'killed, 'crashed' etc. (?)

Interesting. I think this shows that putting in all the extra detail of location, bullets shot, etc gives no improvement in claims approval. Olham: I think perhaps putting multiple witnesses is making your percentage of approvals so bad...I still believe OFF is looking for a two-word witness (wants a first and last name only). Just a guess.

Yep, pretty well a certainty in my mind that the OFF Manager has no idea who was actually closest to you. I suspect any pilot in your squad will do equally well. I have gotten claims approved using non-squad witnesses like 'ground troops' and other similar two word entries. Was hinted long ago by Winder that squadmate name was not absolutely necessary, just have 'something' for a witness (but maybe accurate squad mate name helps the odds? Unknown).

Hi Fawlty: I think the quoted part of your message above is likely your problem...the illegal exec has probably found its way into the OFF files. OFF thinks you have an illegal copy of CSF3 or a pirated disc. If I am right (and I often am not!) then a full delete and reinstall using the 'factory' files from your legit CSF3 cd would be the obvious solution.

I flew Phase2 without Trackir and could track planes and look around using just the hat switch in 'pan' mode. It can be done (with practice), and no need for computer aids of any kind. But yes, hopefully a Trackir is in your future; it really is the way to go.

Target Attacker = CNTRL+` (cntrl+accent) Not sure if it works if you are running TrackIR. Probably not. If you have TrackIR just look where the tracers are coming from like a real pilot would.

No help from me as I have the same thing. Not a big deal, and I just ignore it, but if a solution gets posted I will be grateful too.

1. No, I am pretty sure the AI is all-seeing...no blind spot. 2. Apparently yes, if you have cloud slider on 5, as I believe Polovski posted that the AI can't see through clouds on that setting. 3. Sounds like the AI is doing yo-yo's and cutting inside your turn...nothing foolish about that. 4. Depends of the plane types, you versus the enemy. If you are in a SPAD or Pfalz you should be able to dive away. If you are in a Nieuport, you should not.

Flying flight leader is not an acceptible solution for me as a new pilot would never be leading. Also following is much easier as you don't have to navigate, just follow the leader. When following I rarely have trouble keeping up with the flight leader...I think maybe the problem varies depending on the plane you are flying. In the FE2b it seems very hard to keep up in, while Albatros careers I can easily keep up. If you are flying this as a simulation, and not just a game, then you will never be flying from an outside view. Landings are ususally not a problem in most planes if you come in low and slow (around 60-ish mph in most planes).

The current map is HUGE, so is pixellated because only a small area is used for each flight and is extremely 'blown up'. The crappiness of the map is obvious to all, and I have no doubt would have been improved long ago if it was easy. Winder has posted about all the problems associated with fixing this...map file becomes huge if you go hi res, not to mention the need to rescale everything about how the map functions in the game. Nope, not easy. Then again, never underestimate what these guys can pull out of their hats...we have seen many a rabbit appear in the past :)