SirMike1983

WW1 FPS tend to draw fewer than WW2 because of the nature of trench warfare. Verdun is kind of dated now. It's not a bad game, but it has a weird "floaty" feel to the physics. Beyond the Wire feels better to me, but it doesn't have many players. The WW2 setting is just so varied and dynamic that it's hard to see WW1 as more attractive for most players. Trench warfare FPS is kind of an acquired taste and for the person really into the history of it. Post Scriptum is a fun game, as is Beyond the Wire, but online they have a steep learning curve and require solid team work. Hell Let Loose is a little more "game" and a little less simulation than PS, and it has a solid player base as well, but is also WW2.

My nephews and I still play Interstate '82 on our LAN. We made an early 1980s era Ford Country Squire Wagon with sesame street themed paint scheme. I have no screen shots but suffice to say it was pretty awful and funny all at once. The hood was covered with this: . One of my nephews drove it pretty well in our LAN battles.

Wing values for the EIII are indeed below that of the Halb DII. I dropped them back an addition 8-10%. Already being lower, I went with a conservative approach and did a small drop. The way these values work, do they divide the number up among all the wings? For example I see L wing root and R wing root hit boxes with "points". I changed the points. What it got me to think is whether the # of points given is being divided up among both wings in biplanes, but not with the EIII monoplane (e.g., a biplane with R wing root value 460 would actually be 230 for the lower right wing and 230 for the upper right wing, giving total 460. A monoplane with 460 would have all of that value in the single wing root, making it much harder to destroy. Is that what is happening with these? Or do the biplanes get individualized damaged numbers for each wing, upper and lower?

Is this something done via a text editor like notepad? I might have a look and compare it to the other period planes to see what is up with it. I used to edit FMs for FS2004 on occasion.

I'm flying this DM and I generally think it quite good. The only issue I've seen so far is that the Eindecker appears to be more robust than a Halb D.II or an Alb D.II. I've consistently had to pour hundreds of rounds into E.IIIs to get even slight damage on them. I've had plenty of Halb and Alb wings come off with concentrated shooting, which I think is about right. I tried the same with E.IIIs and I've never seen an E.III structure fail. I'll grant it isn't scientific, but it seems pretty consistent that the E.III is harder to damage than the Halb or Alb scouts. Is there a value difference in the amount of damage an E.III frame can take compared to later German scouts?

I've had this too, but with a different squad. Something may be up with the flights generated at that time. I have a Nieuport career going in that same timeframe (spring 1917) and I'm never encountering any enemies. Even on a scramble that generated last night, no Germans showed up at all. It might be a regional thing, but then again maybe not. I've tried a couple different squads for that period and never encountered any enemies. I just avoid playing that period now. Later 1917 seems fine, and late 1916 seems fine as well.

That is a great thing to hear-- it must have been quite a lot of work to remodel and re-do the items. From what I remember about CFS3, to redo the cockpit is in large part nothing short of having to rework whole parts of the models and reskin items. I'm very impressed with what I have seen of P4.

I do notice some of them now- I like it. The only reason I mention this is that I noticed somewhat random gauge assignments in the Nieuports. The standard 17 has more gauges than the 24 for, for example. From what I have studied of them, there was no "standard" array in a Nieuport, though generally the number of gauges in the cockpit tended to increase as the equipment built up over time. This is a pretty minor/nitpick issue, admittedly. I plan on getting P4 as soon as it's out. I view OFF as the true successor to the RB, given its focus on history and its wide-ranging scope. This is the most flown sim in my library of them, by far.

I like the sound of the increased capabilities in tracking everything. Is there a plan to update aircraft from P3 (add new gauges/cockpit updates etc?)?

That sounds like a lot of coding to be done-- tracking all the persons and planes in the squadron and keeping a runny tally. It sounds as though more than ever the manager will be the real heart of the game as the "brains" as it were. I think that is a good thing, myself. More and more you'd have to leave the CFS3 confines to really push things farther and more advanced. I think the manager has the potential to do that.

Bump again for a good thread. I actually cut back my visits here because there were so many OT posts in the general OFF area.

In the RB II/3D days I used to design such missions but had to use the mission builder. I used to do 2 flights of 6 per side in a sort of "big quick combat" mode. I'm glad to see this sort of thing will be coming as quick combat to OFF P4.

I mix in Rise of Flight sometimes. ROF has the advantage of its own unique engine and physics, but OFF has the advantage for period immersion, stronger campaign and wider array of options for play. They each offer different focus. My machine plays OFF more reliably; I do get somewhat random lag spikes in ROF on occasion. I usually play ROF in single mission mode, just messing around with dog fights and the like. I play the off career mode more.

Oddly, I'm most drawn to the new features in the manager. It actually has that "Red Baron" feel going.

Welcome back