SirMike1983

Nice looking aircraft going there.

I'm finding a full loop against a closely following D.VII is the best way to shake AI D.VII aircraft. It seems to throw them off track and disorient them enough to buy a couple moments and get a quick turning shot off. I'm having luck with the following method: Don't lead the flight, let a computer pilot do that. Once something white you suspect is an enemy appears on the TAC (I believe limited TAC is allowed under even the strict DiD standards), go into a climb and let your flight pull away towards the unknown entity. This way you'll be behind and high above your flight. Once the whites turn red, under realism standard you turn your TAC off. But you'll still generally know where the action will be. Stay above your flight and let them close with the enemy. Usually these D.VIIs are above you. Allow them to dive on your flight and let the battle begin. This will get the enemy AI to "lock on" to your AI flight members and begin the battle. As the battle progresses a bit, it will tend to go lower and lower. This is when you strike, if you choose to fight instead of leave-- pick out a D.VII and dive on him. Use the F6/TrackIR gunsight; you can use it to snipe off some shots. Come in hot, shoot him up a bit, and climb away. Continue to do this until you've used up your height advantage; then pull away from the group if you can. Start up some hit and run level passes on them. Use that gunsight-- it's actually pretty good. If you get one behind you (and this does happen if they lock on), full throttle the engine and dive away from him. Get your speed up nice and fast (but not too fast) and pull into a loop. Assuming he's close enough to get caught in the spread of the loop, he'll try to climb with you. However he will probably stall because you gained more speed in that dive (having had the advantage of the first move). When you return from your loop, you'll both be slow, but he'll be slower and disoriented a bit (AI seems to get this way when they're locked onto you, but lost you). This is when you put the nose down just enough to get some speed for a good turn. Get a few shots on him then. This will often damage his plane and give you a strong enough advantage to win the encounter later on. Do NOT attempt the loop method if the enemy is too far away to get caught up inside your loop. If he's that far off, peg the throttle and run out on him a bit and then come back for a head-on pass (or you can just leave if you choose). If you get a bunch on you and you need to run-- full throttle dive away. Get VERY low and VERY fast. The AI D.VIIs do not fly well close ot the ground and seem to float about down at very low altitudes. You want to be at treetop level and fast. Generally you can get away using this method, but do watch out for ground fire.

Enlist a year or so later (or more) and you should have a lot more action. The planes in OFF do cover a good deal of time in WW1, but the bulk are going to appear later in 1916 and in 1917. By 1918, you should encounter enemy aircraft on most missions (e.g., 94th Aero in fall 1918).

Fair review-- I'd hate to be a first time newbie learning against this AI and sim: it's very challenging. Having a lot of experience under my belt at this point though, I love it.

Welcome-- it's indeed a great sim.

OvS had the same crap with the Hells Angels (RB3d add on) site. It was a good site and good add-on, but hackers struck and destroyed it, from what I recall. It's sadly becoming more common.

I back up the files-- useful.

Which .cfg file needs to be edited? There are several folders supposedly pertaining to the Spad 13, do I need to edit all of them, or just one? If so which?

AI difference between P2 and P3 is like night and day.

They actually were quality planes in their day (1913-14). It's just that they were not intended for military purposes so much as general flying. They're an example of the "pioneer" or "early" birds that really were just early general aviation planes. They're a unique experience, even compared to an E.III. Late war D.VII and Spad pilots will be in for a rude surprise with them, but the Morane L and N aircraft along with other early birds represent a unique experience apart from what you might find later on. These are even primitive and low-powered compared to a Fee. But they're just a different experience. I don't think you can compare to later craft with accuracy.

I think with the great variety of data here, it might be possible to do an edited FM perhaps. Anyone here know much about building flight behavior?

Exactly-- it's one of things where you have to train yourself to hit and run rather than just turning and pulling back. More video!

Nice data there-- I hadn't seen the quantitative NASA chart before.

I agree with what has been said: the Spad XIII has some freaky behaviors at the lower end of its envelope. The turning stalls are pretty sharp and violent. They're unexpected as well. It seems like it has a combat speed window of only a few miles per hour between going to slow to fight and too fast to shoot. As to the throttle question: yes, the spad had a throttle. However I'm skeptical as to the game's stall behavior for the XIII. Cole Palen reported it had to be "landed engine on", but did not specify anything out of the ordinary in terms of it having to be landed at a very high speed. I think it needs to be stabilized in terms of its accelerated stall characteristics. The plane turned reasonably well (not great, but not bad) by many reports (especially compared to the VII, which was disliked by some pilots due to slow roll rate). I think the general proposition that this is a boom and zoom plane is right. I think the current flight model takes a step toward getting that. Though I think the lower envelope characteristics pointed out by Bullet do have some issues. It actually goes into a snap spin more easily than the Camel, which is weird. Eh- my 2 cents on it. I've gotten better at it after practicing a lot, but the behavior is still strange. The aircraft model and skins are gorgeous in-game though.

Nice video-- I like the close up at the end. That high power motor sure does it credit in climbing, and no accelerated stall-spin!

I was into plastics a number of years ago. But after going over to mostly WW1 models, I've found I like the old-style wood frame kits better. Guillows always made good ones, as did Comet.

They look great. I'm especially psyched about that N.24. What gauges will be going into the cockpit for it? You probably can get away with doing the N.17 cockpit and adding a couple more gauges to it (which you already have as well probably). I'm pretty excited about that one-- haven't flown an N.24 since the RB days.

Fair enough, the Spad topic has run its course for the time anyway.

I've helped dev a mod for HL2 involving the American Revolution for the past few years, and "vanishing" contributors are a universal problem. We'd have people come, work on a project a little ways, then just leave. It'd be nice if they left the half-finished project though! I think what happens is people get into the game, work awhile, run out of steam, and then just go off and do other things. It's perfectly fine, but their eyes for the project are often bigger than their stomachs, so to speak. One of those things I guess... What I will say is that OFF has had a very good record in terms of team members staying on. The project began several years ago, and some of the guys have been there the whole time. I envy that level of commitment, Pol. I wish our game had more guys like that. I will also add you guys have been really responsive in terms of forum input involving the game as well. What still sticks out in my mind is the discussions we had on the old board prior to P2, when you were working on the Nieuports. I remember the forum goers dug up a bunch of Nieuport cockpit and detail pictures and put them up. Awhile later you came back with an N.17 that looked just like the pictures we'd found. That was first rate work, and it really felt like the team had done its homework, so to speak. I think the final product has shown that to be thecase.

Originally it was the opposite: the change to the top wing shape on the 13 was actually meant to speed roll and reduce accelerated stalls, in the original 7 design. A number of pilots complained the 7 had a slow roll rate and poor turn characteristics. The 13 actually was a big improvement in that regard with its frame shape change.

That's EXACTLY what it feels like: the accelerated stall behavior is unlike the other planes I've flown in the game. It faces D.VIIs and has little chance against them, except to run away. It even struggles against Alb D.Va aircraft. Maybe I'll have a crack at the flight model behavior some time.

Me neither-- the Spad 13 is strangely unstable in my experience and actually seems more difficult to fly than the Camel in the game for some reason. Though there is a US Camel squad or two around.

Would love to see the N.24 and the N.28, but I think 2 seaters are a concern. Part of what made Red Baron II/3d work was the presence of many different 2 seaters you could escort/attack/encounter. The more seasoned pilots who go back to those days will know what I'm talking about. Would be nice to see that again.

Excellent website! My French is a bit rusty, but still readable for sure.

I've long found the analogy of flying fighter aircraft being like hunting to be laughable. It would be more like hunting if they gave the deer a gun too. But I don't know too many bucks who carry a pair of machine guns with them. <br /><br /> I think to survive for very long you need to either be very lucky or somewhat lucky and tactically-minded. I was never very lucky, so I have to be tactically minded (as I set out above). Thanks to it being only a sim, it's more fun than unnerving.