33LIMA

These limited observations are based on a couple of Albatros CIII single missions in FE2, at Hard FM (understand the AI flies Normal FM even then). Own plane and AI planes (2-4) all took off ok. Takeoff run was long. In Flanders terrain, the AI planes seemed nearly to reach the airfield boundary before finally unsticking (I watched them go before taking off myself). My own plane only just made it, had to pull her off the ground and got stall buffet sound till I was above tree height and could ease the stick forward (I know the trees are 'ghosts' but still!). In Cambrai terrain, much the same, except MAYBE the AI got airborne a bit easier, maybe not. Still a very long run (compared to scouts anyway, as it should be, but also to the field length) I wonder if on takeoffs on any airfield or in any direction with a short run before the trees, the AI don't make it and the sim somehow prevents them getting unstuck unless they manage it inside the airfield boundary - even if the trees don't impede them. Strange. PS glad the dog made it, hope he does well from here.

PS forgot you asked about settings, I use Olham's here, for CFS3config: http://combatace.com...graphics-setup/ ...with my own choice of settings for the other OFF Manager settings, eg aircraft skins hi-res (managed this ok even with my budget 9300GS, now have a slightly older but much better 8800GT), object density medium, guns easy/less accurate, fuel/ammo load rather than unique skin to balance out the AI flying at unladen weight etc etc PS should have said in the first post, I believe your CFS3 and OFF installs are entirely independent, doing anything which sets up CFS3, won't help OFF; hence they have separate cfs3config files, and each needs run separately, for the sim whose folder it resides in, CFS3 or OFF, creating separate configoverrides files.

What is it that's telling you you're missing this file - an error message when you trry to do what - run OFF to get into OFF Manager? Run a mission (=get into CFS3) after that? Configoverrides.xml IIRC is the file that holds the settings you make when you run CFS3config - you know, the one with the detail sliders, over-rides, texture limits etc. Which you can either run by clicking on the cfs3config.exe file itself, in the CFS3 (for CFS3) or CFSWW1 OFF (for OFF) root directories; or run from inside OFF's Workshop (for OFF only, naturally), by using the 'set config' button. Not sure why you're missing one, maybe your unusual install procedure? Try running config from OFF Manager, choose your settings as per Olham's guide as usual, set screen res, set sliders, in over-rides turn off dual pass render and do all the usual good stuff. Save settings and hopefully that will create a Configoverrides.xml for you, in the right place. Of if that does not work, find Configoverrides.xml in your equivalent CFS3 App Data folder and copy it across to your OFF App Data folder (path as per your post). I think it should be the same file for CFS3 and OFF and interchangeable, tho it will bring over your CFS3 settings into OFF, so you may have to run config from OFF Manager to change them if you need to.

Yeah, I see now the NZ producers of the clip say it was "...produced as a training exercise for student actors and therefore only a review mechanism within their Screen Performance Course" which I hope is true and not just an attempt to limit the reputational damage from what was a pretty stupid thing to do regardless of the real situation. Trust the final script and the real acting will be an order of magnitude better, tho frankly for all its limitations 'the Dambusters' is one of those films that should be left in peace, like "the Battle of Britain'. Even if they kept Gibson's dog's name accurate (which they won't) the 1955's film's relatively few bits or artistic licence are entirely forgiveable and effective; and you just won't get better period performances that Robert Todd and Michael Redgrave. Plus there's the Dambuster's March, what can possibly replace that? After me, now, everybody, 'Daa, daa daa daa da da da da...'

None, thanks very much. If - as seems VERY likely- 'Red Baron', Flyboys' and 'U571' are representative of current capabilities, and this clip from the coming 'Dambusters' remake is representative of a more 'realistic' treatment - we really have already seen the best films we're going to get out of WW1 and WW2:

Now, those are going to be really nice skins, down to the maker's labels on the nicely-laminated props. Can't wait!

Try running dxdiag and see what version of DirectX you're on (it's sort-of buried in the long version number on the first page of the dxdiag diagnostic report, IIRC) and whether it reports any probs. Have you tried D/L'ing & (re-?)installing DX9.0c from MS? Or DX10 if your card supports it? I gather there's no prob in installing more than one version of DirectX and anyway the installer checks if you have the files before it installs them. After reformatting I presume you re-installed Windows - XP is it? Did you patch XP right afterwards, to latest version ie Service Pack 3? An update to SP3 I think should get you DX9.0c if you haven't already updated. Sometimes it takes a while for automatic updates to 'catch up'. IIRC Win XP had DX8 when it came out, DX9 arrived soon after. Maybe you have DX8 after your fresh install but need DX9, maybe it's your graphics card that needs DX9 and is objecting to DX8, dunno if backward compatibility is a prob there. Dunno if your unorthodox install could cause any probs. Dunno very much do I? :) Patch order is I think apparent from the OFF website for BH&H and HitR, here, apply patches for the former then those for the latter, that's what I did anyway: http://www.overflandersfields.com/Downloads.htm Good luck!

Yes the Hell's Angel's scenes were pretty good too, tho B&W (and marred by a lot of facial over-acting by the fliers and some general over-acting by the professional actors). As with Waldo Pepper it's the over-the-shoulder shots that make the difference, where you can see the pilots really working to stay on the tail or get away, instead of the relatively tame flying or 'blue screen' projections in some films or the effortless CGI that we get such a diet of today. Never particularly liked 'Dawn Patrol'; always liked train sets and it hurt terribly to see them and the nice model poison gas factory being blown sky high by Cooper bombs that fell straight down and then went off like Grand Slams. Looking at Hell's Angels again, I think a flyable Jean Harlow would be nice in P4:

Yes mate tho it's a fictionalised version, it's clearly Udet in his barnstorming days. The flying sequences were very good and the film is alternately funny and sad, a great film for anyone interested in flying. Couple more teasers, if the second clip isn't about the best WW1-style dogfight ever seen in a movie I don't know what was: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1FYRNjpuHA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlQT6m7StAY

I'm assuming that the DVD drive has similar problems with at least some other CDs or DVDs? Does the OFF DVD 'spool up' a bit in the drive and then go quiet (rather than you being able to open if and see it as an empty disc)? If those are the symptoms them your drive may be reverting from DMA mode to PIO mode, happened to me sometimes with XP; easy way to check is to open the IDE ATA/ATAPI controllers entry in Device Manager, find the IDE channel your DVD drive uses, and check its Properties/Adavnced settings tab. There, under 'Current Settings' you should see something like 'Ultra DMA mode 6'. If it says PIO mode then the channel has reverted to a crap setting (technical term, there) and will have trouble reading DVDs and CDs. Happened to me a couple of times; Google DMA reverts to PIO to get a solution, IIRC I used # 6 here, it's not as complex as it looks the first sentences describe what's done the rest is tech-waffle: http://winhlp.com/node/10 Worth checking in Device Manager that it's not PIO. If not sure which channel your DVD drive is using, check 'em all. Gawd, don't you just LOVE PC's, IBM and Charlie Chaplin have a lot to answer for.

Hated Red Baron when I first saw it too, for all the same reasons as everyone else, not least that they could have made a film at least as good by sticking broadly to the truth. Having said that, glass half full, the flying, the planes, the airfields and the uniforms are a joy to behold (apart from the overdone roll-rates etc) and the music score is very good. I can buy the opening boy-on-a-horse scene as an allegory for MvR's subsequent escape from ground to air, and it sets some childhood background without repeating the Blue Max approach which sort of stole the thunder there. I've mellowed a bit with Flyboys too, yes the swarms of Red Dr1s are infuriating to anyone even remotely knowledgeable, some of the flying scenes are corny, staged affairs, and I know some Americans were/are natural shots but drilling the 'Black Falcon' with a .45 is just such corny Yankee Doodle Dandy hookum. But the story is not too badly told and as in RB, some of the visuals are very good and the French air service ambience is a nice change. Still reckon Blue Max is king of the hill, with Aces High next (and they were not perfect either) with The Great Waldo Pepper close behind (enough WW1 factor to qualify and a great flying movie):

Your instructors must have been either very understanding, or deaf from leaving off their ear defenders :)

Just flew a campaign mission with the latest HPW FMs and DM in an Albatros DIII (early). Attacked a formation of 4 Strutters at 3000m. Either I still have not got the hang of the 'attack' command, with or without the 'radar' turned on and targets selected or not, or my wingmen are complete dolts (and cowards to boot) or maybe they attacked completely different targets I didn't even see; but apart from one desultory effort they ignored the targets under their noses and left me to it. Anyway I ended up attacking the flight of strutters on my own and had a hard time staying in my targets' blind spots, ended up more often than I should have, trading rounds desparately with the observers, while their formation mates had a good rattle at me, undisturbed by my useless flight mates. Yes my engine was hit and eventually it conked out but not before I got two and had already disengaged after expended all my ammo and then tailed the retreating Sopwiths for a while, trying once again to get my flight mates to attack the beggars. Considering my fairly determined (reckless?) solo attacks (and the fact the strutters seemed to have a Gotha-style fuselage tunnel they could shoot through, who was it said OFF 2-seaters had a poor field of fire, not these guys!) and the fact my motor kept going long enough after being hit, I don't have any complaints about the engine damage, based on that sortie at least. Rear gunners are set at 'Less accurate', any higher and I wouldn't be writing this :) Time will tell.

Any news on this mod? Was looking forward to it, having found like others that FE1 cloud mods are actually FE2 cloud killers :(

Wow - yes! That's a lovely model of a really elegant plane! Off to grab it now! Another gap in the FE planeset filled nicely!

I would have thought that attacking a 2-seater from close range anywhere in the cone of fire of the observer, if the 2-seater wasn't stunting, SHOULD result in the attacker getting a good dose of lead somewhere, more often than not. Which is why the drill was to attack from under the tail, and stay there (many will have seen the RFC/RAF training poster showing how to turn first in the opposite direction if a 2-seater you attacked this way turned, so you would stay in his blind spot, before turning back in). The observer's moveable gun(s) would often be more than a match for the attacker's fixed gun(s) - easier to aim, all things taken into account. Some aces like McCudden are on record as believing a well-handled 2-seater was more than a match for a scout (and we're not talking Bristol Fighters here). Attacking two or more alert 2-seaters flying in formation would be quite dangerous for a single scout (apart from BE2c's, tho in OFF the lack of realistic defensive armament means they are too easy). Massacres like the 6 RE8's attacked & shot down by Jasta 11 in Bloody April were the exception not the rule. Many 2-seaters shot down were surprised while the observer was occupied with his work, they were not just air gunners but had to spot for the artillery, or take photos, or carry out visual recce's. Using OFF Manager to minimise gunner accuracy is probably a crude-but-reasonably-effective way of allowing for this sort of thing, albeit indirectly. So I'm not sure the (stock?) DM is at fault here (apart from the engine sometimes falling out of the often-intact airframe, which I have seen regularly in the Albatros). I have flown many sims which are much worse for 'sniper' rear gunners like IL2, CFS2 (and 3 to an extent) and B17-2.

Best thing to do is download the time-unlimited demo. I have a Q8200 and a 512Mb (GDDR3) 8800GT and it runs smoothly and looks very good indeed on medium-to-low settings. It has only the Alb DV and SPAD XIII as flyable but i believe everything else is included as AI-flown. It's a pretty massive d/l and you then have to register and log in every time you start the game which is a bit of a pain. At the moment I still much prefer First Eagles 2 and Over Flanders Fields, which both look more than good enough and have an extremely wide set of flyable planes (OFF out of the box, FE2 comes with less but has even more than OFF available as free downloads, many of first-class quality), Even if you buy every plane currently available, RoF can't yet match either, and still has some significant gaps in the planeset eg no BE2 or RE8 (yet). Apart from the really beautifully-modelled and animated planes, RoF's current strength compared to FE2 and OFF is probably multiplayer plus it does 'complex engine management', neither of which interest me.

If you're the leader, or solo, you're perfectly entitled to choose your own route, perfectly realistic to do so also. Unless you are tied in with someone else eg an escort job. From many accounts, two-seaters on either side were always ready to nip back across to their own side if they saw a threat. Used exactly your tactics myself on a BE2 mission the other day, flew up my side of the Lines till opposite the target, had a good look, then nipped over and back by the shortest route, wasn't too far over so no need to vary the route back. Got away with it too. I regard both (campaign) waypoints and mission types as suggestions only. Tend to use the stock waypoints only for longer-range missions when I can't avoid them because my 'drome is a long way from the Lines and I may therefore decide to warp if time is short. If I get a silly mission like artillery observation in a scout or (unless in a Camel, DH5 or other ground-strafer) a railyard attack in a scout, I just fly a more realistic mission instead, normally a patrol near the lines. With other flights going about their own business there is nearly always trade to be had. I don't use the 'realistic missions' mod as I tend to forget to enable and disable in between career changes or sectors going noisy/quiet.

Probably by choice of 'less aggressive AI' and 'die on dice roll' (to compensate for the horrible forced landing ability) - and by flying an Albatros DIII in April 1917 - my main pilot is doing fairly well with 17 claims confirmed and 2 pending. However, 16 claims were rejected. Is this ratio common? I am quite sure I brought down all the planes claimed. In one case I spelt my witness's name wrong. In one or two others, the EA might have recovered and made it back, or a flight mate got the credit by putting the final rounds into him. But most I am sure went down, and were my own kills. There must be another factor or two at work, which I could do something about to get fewer rejections. Any suggestions? For example, does choice of witness help? Is it better to turn on labels and use the name of the closest flight mate rather than my number 2? I doubt the text you fill in on the Claim Form makes much difference; I rarely estimate a time but generally, as well as type, I give (eg) 'Shot down in flames from 2000 metres from formation of 4, between Cambrai and Douai, crew seen to jump out'. Is it better or worse to use the single- and two-seater options if your drop-down list has similar variants, where chosing the wrong sub-type might get a rejection? I have recently re-started using HPW's FM and DM mods, which makes it all the more important that I do not lose kills due to inadequate understanding of what's needed! Others will be in the same boat - sorry, plane. PS UncleAl if you're watching, I did search for this but no joy.

Yeah if there's a lot of stuff showing up as running in Task Manager it might be a good idea to apply Black Viper's tweaks to the underlying services. Been using his recommendations myself for ages, just use services.msc like he says; http://www.blackviper.com/ ...also maybe run msconfig and look at unticking any processes in the 'Startup' tab that you don't need, usually there's one or two.

The classic example of the Great British Military Understatement is often said to be during the Battle of the Imjin in Korea, where a British commander is reported to have told his American HQ that 'Things are a bit sticky' or some similar phrase. Had the recipient been a British officer, this message would have indicated the situation was extremely serious, but in the circumstances the US one took it to mean things weren't too bad.

If you like T34-v-Tiger you will probably like SF42 a lot better. T-v-T has some nice features, not least the superb Tigers, but SF42 lets you command your tank platoon whereas in TvT you can try to co-operate with the other units but you have no way to interact with them, they just follow their own scripts. The sF 42 'ambience' is vastly superior, with MGs rattling, cannon fire barking, sharpnell clunking off your armour, and the air alive with shouting (ok you can hear more than you should and distance seems to make little difference but the overall effect is of being in a real battle). The visuals are also good, including tracers which richochet nicely. Highly recommended for anyone who hasn't got it already, tho you may have to trawl on eBay. Plus there's a mod which adds playable Tigers and other mods, details here: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=178218 ..and a KoenigsTiger Looking forward to the same company's 'Blaze of War' with M60A3-vs-T62 and a range of interesting conflicts, including an Iranian Chieftain which will sooner or later be modded as playable:

Textbook tank-infantry tactics, and what was achieved in practice, are two different things. For example, Michael Wittmann's action at Villers-Bocage, where his Tiger was knocked-out by 6pdr AT fire from a flank after driving into the village with no infantry support, or Paul Gaebner's SS panzeraufklaerungs abteilung's action on the Arnhem bridge itself. Or many a panzer attack in Normandy where the ferocious allied artillery fire stripped the panzergrenadiers away from the panzers; or the allied attacks where the 'motor rifle' units didn't keep up with tanks which then ran onto concealed Pak positions. At least the Panthers in the above film seem to be using 'fire and manouevre'. As for for realism in SPR...high production values certainly, but a single rifle section taking out an alert, dug in MG42, and doing it with just one casualty (more like a job for an infantry platoon of 3 sections); US paras on D-Day fighting Waffen SS with Tiger tanks, when the worst they faced on the day - bad enough without moviemaker exaggeration- was average (or below average, non-infantry) Wehrmacht units and some re-cycled ex-French Army 1930s-vintage tanks; and the P51s then destroying said Tigers with laser-guided-bomb accuracy - high production values maybe, historical/military accuracy outside the uniforms, kit sound effects and yes the gore, don't think so.

Can't find a campaign-making tutorial for any of the SF series, here or on TW, so here goes. The stock FE campaigns seem to consist of precisely 1 file which has a ref to a campaign_data .ini file which I can't find and is obviously only part of the set. A look at a user-made campaign shows a larger set of files including that data.ini file but even then it's less than immediately obvious how it goes together. What I'd like to do is create campaigns for one or more specific squadrons, designed to enable you to fly with it from say late 1916 to war end and move when it moves, change planes when it changes. Similar to OFF which does this, or RB3d which did it with a date-driven 'user unofficial patch'. Granted such campaigns would not be much use for flying with other squadrons but they could be 'cloned' for them eg Jasta 11, Jasta 2, 56 Sqn. First subjects would be: - 46 Sqn RFC, inspired by AG Lee's book 'No Parachute'; an interesting transition from 2-seaters (Nieuport 12s, could use Spephen1918's upcoming N.10 or if all else fails a Strutter) then Pups then Camels; and - Jasta 5, starting around Verdun with Albatros/Halberstadt DIIs in late 1916, then moving North and onto DIIIs and DVs, then to Fokker DVIIs, maybe some time on DR1s or Pfalzs. I think I may have seen an airfield change in FE1, but not sure (it certainly wasn't exactly trumpeted!); I don't believe it can handle aircraft 'upgrades' tho. Anyways, the plan is to break each campaign into a series of successive phases, with a new one each time either aircraft or base changes. That way, I could can use the campaign start screen to give the player a decent indication of what happened and make a visible event out of the upgrade/base change, adding a sense of time passing and things progressing. Might also have to introduce a break for a major event in between such changes eg major battle opening. Segmenting it like that could also mean that famous aces could come and go in the roster, albeit not strictly historically. A Jasta 11 campaign could be based around the comings and goings of MvR as well as changes to planes and bases, a Jasta 2 campaign similarly around the arrival and departure of Boelcke and his successors. Motivation is that I would like to fly campaigns in FE/FE2 that enabled you to enlist with a famous squadron and fly with it longer-term than just one battle, changing planes with the times. Careers rather than campaigns I suppose you could describe it. Not sure how well it would work but would like to find out, starting with some research into the above units and trying to find my way around the FE/SF campaign system - hence this post!

OK thanks for the tip. I can probably learn a lot just by studying the files for other home-made campaigns and a lot of trail and error, but it would certainly speed things up if I could get some hints and tips - will try Baltika and maybe Firecage - thanks again!