peter01

Glad you like them, and happy you posted...its hard to know, sometimes, you get caught up in particular tricky aspects of the FM, and somehow, become oblivious to other issues . So any comments, good or critical helps. Yes, the Alb D5s are different to before Tooner, and to one another slightly too. You may want to retry the Alb D3 160hp, stall effects when turning etc have been reduced. I'm flying Albs a lot these days as well. Thanks, Whiteknight06604, seems a pretty accurate assessment for a few hours testing. The seemingly trivial and innocuous gundata changes do make a big difference in realism and gameplay for me too.

Just uploaded. Despite all the above posts, you should still read the readme Should be available shortly here http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?autoc...p;showfile=6214 Let me know if there are any issues. Cheers

Thanks guys. Another post, did say there were a few things...... It relates to using the alternative FMs in place of the stock ones, or at least modding the stock ones yourself if you have already made changes, eg, P10ppy's Spad7s, Tailspins suggestions etc. Firstly, I think the Spad13, Se5, Albs and FokkerD7s FMs are better than the stock ones, from both a perspective of feel and performance. To me, the Spad13 should be a powerhouse, the FokkerD7s should be superior, the Se5a should lay some claim to be a war winning plane and the Albs... well, they need to have a fighting chance. Secondly, not so obviously, are the disparities if you don't. Example, you fly the stock Camel, everything is how it should be, you shoot up everything, but your wingmates/squadron are at a severe disadvantage compared to add-on AI. The add-on AI are better, despite the Camel perhaps having good/better performance. In addition, flying against the Camel AI will be far easier than say flying against the Hanriot and most others too. It means the game would be quite inconsistent for the important planes. If you have made changes to the Spad7s, Dr1 and Camels & don't want to install mine, as I have only changed the AI data, I'd recommend you copy the [FlightControl] - for stall speeds mainly - and the [AIData] stuff from mine over what is currently in your data.ini. That also applies to P10ppy's excellent Spad12 - use the [FlightControl] and [AIData] sections from the Spad7 (180). For the Albs, Se5a, Spad13, FokkerD7s, its not so simple. I doubt my AI data parameters would work with the stock FM on these, as the FM and the performance has been changed considerably. In any case, these stock ones are underdone peformance-wise compared to the rest. If you stick with the stock ones, thats fine....just wanted to point out what that meant. I'd appreciate feedback on the FMs, and it'll help in doing other FMs for the EP.

This next bit I've been umming and ahhing about a bit - extra files to enhance gameplay, maybe. The reason I'm uncertain is that people make their own changes to these files & testing everything is problematic. But in providing a whole set of FMs (more on why you should use all the FMs, not just say add-on planes in next post), its an opportunity to get things in one place, and I'd say there are quite a few new players here too. Also to get over one problem with Rockets. I'll be providing several Aircraftobject.inis, gundata ini files and gundata dat files (they go together), and weapons ini files and weapons dat files (go together too). You don't need to use ANY of these files. You can use some not others, they are not a set so to speak. They are in the right directory structure in the zip file. EG, the weapondata files are in a "Weapons" folder (you need to copy the folder, or create one if you don't have it. The others go in your "Objects" folder. First the Aircraftobject.ini. Several files...Aircraftobject.ini, Aircraftobject_hard.ini, Aircraftobject_normal.ini, Aircraftobject_original.ini. The Aircraftobject.ini default one is the hard one.....it makes the AI more capable, better shots, better defensively, much more aggressive. Together with the AI stuff in the FMs themselves it makes the AI as hard as you could want. If too hard (it is even for me in campaigns), you could just use TKs (by deleting the Aircraftobject.ini, it will default to the original in the game), or to make a little easier even then TKs (still very tough with my FMs) use Aircraftobject_normal.ini by deleting the Aircraftobject.ini and renaming it the normal file one to Aircraftobject.ini. This ones keeps Aces very tough, but makes the rest easier, tho still a challenge, again if you use my FMs (they work together). In addition to these options you can make the AI easier or harder in the game options by selecting the "Enemy Skill Level" .... Hard, Normal, Easy. This only affects the ENEMY AI, not your wingmates/squadron. Its important I think to get the AI the way you want, some like it tougher some don't, so these provide a whole range of options. Second is the Gundata files. Two sets here, modified version and a copy of the original from the game. The modified version reduces the effectiveness of machine guns by reducing the ammo weight 60%. Eg, Spandau default weight is 10 grams, now 6 grams. It has been reduced 60% for the Lewis, Vickers, Spandau, Parabellum. No other changes. Included the original to save you extracting if you want to make your own changes, but use the guneditor if you do so! The benefit as I see it: you will notice the difference between having two guns and one gun; bits will still fly off planes, but not to the same extent, especially whole wings (bit arcadish to me); you can shoot down a plane in a few shots if accurate (no lucky shots, you should get up close), but it can take much more if you don't hit critical bits; in a furball you will need to watch your ammo, you can't down 3 or 4 planes without being a good shot; funnily enough it works in your favour too...with tougher better AI (which is good to me), you will get shot up, but not necessarily downed in a couple of shots, ie, your survival chances improve: ai versus ai seems fine (but depends on your choice of the capability of the ai as above, ie the more capable, the higher the casualties are on both sides. Needless to say you do not need to use this file, or do your own (use the guneditor!!). but it makes a very significant difference in gameplay to me . The last files are the Weapondata files. I did this as Rockets don't work at the moment, for say the Dolphin, and others. It explodes when you fire them. Hope its okay P10ppy, but I modded the weaponsdata file so the Rockets work like P10ppy's LePrieur Rockets. Nice and inaccurate too. It was excellent work by P10ppy. I have also included P10ppy's rockets in the file, but to use them you need to download other things and follow the instructions by P10ppy for the Spad 7s, and by Tailspin for the Camel etc. Again, you don't need to use this file. Fairly long post, maybe not clear to newer players, maybe anyone hehe, so any questions please ask.

Going well, think I've finished, just need to tidy up, maybe a couple of days. In this lot there are 26 planes, a total of 31 FMs with various extra Camels, Spad 7s and Hanriots etc. Mainly updates (tho major changes), to the previous lot I uploaded, with the addition of the Tripe, Pup, Brisfit, Pfalz D3. From TKs lot, the Camels, Spad7s and FokkerDr1 haven't changed from the stock FMs, just AI changes to get consisent. The Se5a, Spad 13, Fokker D7, Fokker D7Fs, Alb D3s and Alb Dvs have been redone. Also an extra Alb D3 160 hp version. The Alb D3s haven't changed much from my previous upload, the Alb Dvs have somewhat. The Fokker D7s have also changed from my "definitive" version :blush2:. The Se5a and Spad 13 have changed a lot. From EmID, the N28 and the Hanriots. The Hanriots haven't changed, except for a couple of AI parameters to fix AI/autopilot problems with the original FMs. N28 a lot diffferent. From Laton, the Fokker D8. Changed considerably. From the A-Team, the Brisfit, Dolphin, Snipe, Pup, Tripe, Junkers D1, Schuckert D3, Pfalz D3, Pfalz Dr1, Pfalz D8, Pfalz D12. All but the Junkers have changed considerably. I think thats the lot. Its most of the mid 1917-end of war fighters we have, N24 and N27 still to come. AS Firecage pointed out, I think you can use the multi-engine add-on bombers from the A-Team, Laton, MontyCZ in the EP as AI as is, maybe even flying too - the Handley Page, Gotha, Staaken, Savoia Pomilio, Caproni. Thanks to Laton, EmID, the A-Team and of course TK, for these great models and allowing me to do FMs for them.

Thanks fellas.

yeah, we need a patch. I think our hot fix went into WOI anyway, still would like a blipping sound, and maybe a new rotary sound hehe. all would be forgiven then (well, still want gyro effects too) have you seen this... http://paul-flightsimguy.spaces.live.com/?...%26ayear%3d2008 incredible. its one of reasons I like this era. there's nuthin like rotary sounds

I can't really speak for others (but it never stopped me before generally in life ), but I appreciate you saying this, I'm sure the those on the list above would agree - we like people enjoying what we spent time doing(sometimes lots!!!). You are right, many more on that list too: EmID, TexMurphy, Laton, MontyCZ, gambit, max, Edward, Gepard, Aladar. Others too? Its a good idea sticking to the Pre-EP game to fly all the planes. The number (not to mention quality) of planes we have as you say is astounding, and one of the best things in FE. I would encourage any person new to the game that wants to fly all the planes, and goes to the considerable trouble, as you have, of downloading/installing this stuff, to fly the pre-EP game seperately. The planes all work fine there, we all loved this game before, you will maybe too. But I'd agree with Tailspin, the EP is absolutely worth getting. It is a better game. I'm not sure many are aware but there are actually numerous improvements to the game with this version. Some things that are not mentioned often are: ground collision modelling was very shonky in previous version, works well now; it is better that there are no soft landings, you don't get that silly scenario where a pilot without an engine working tries to follow you around and shoot you down; stress modelling is done quite well (its not used much yet, I for one am still learning); AI now don't go to "ground", waiting to be shot up, and if low try to get height (this was very annoying to me before); I believe with the previous point, improved collision modelling and some new ai options you can indeed have tree top fights in some planes say camel, Dr1; engine starts; takeoffs are much better/more interesting (again early days for FM'ers, but possibilities are good); damage modelling is far better, ie, what happens when you lose a stab or wing etc - a great improvement and a major issue for us before; although we made the AI pretty good/tough in pre-EP, it is better now in handling stalls and in variety and possibilities, overall a great improvement; the FMs are considerably better (just much harder to do!! at the moment, at least). There are many smaller (but important) ones as well - TK was very painstaking, and did a great job. Actually I don't think there's much wrong at all with the EP (a few bugs yes, but TK always fixes bugs - horizon, minor AI issues, some graphical issues). I like it very much. My only issue with it is a personal one: I am finding the FMs very difficult to do, or at least to do as well as I'm sure they can be done. Just two things the EP is lacking, perhaps. Campaigns/immersion, but thats TKs game, take it or leave it. TK won''t do much here, its up to modders to slowly (with heaps of important, time consuming things) transform this area, with terrains, objects etc. Second point is a transitional one: not all planes are flyable as per pre-EP, or at least not done right for the new game. But thats just a matter of time, I guess. Like you, I hope we do get some of these other planes. Laton has started a few of them, and I hope he continues with the Italian front stuff to, and transforms that, as he and Bort did with the early part of the war. Cheers

Thanks for your encouragement. These days, I do FMs for myself & my own game, but upload thinking/hoping others will enjoy them too, so appreciate your post.

Thanks for the heads up capun. It is interesting, and does open up more opportunities in AI tuning and variety. TKs AI are becoming wonderfully versatile, capable opponents.

Thanks, sorry you inadvertently got caught up in all this...its been simmering within me for the past couple of months. That performance improvement was a huge undertaking - you have to test every plane against most other planes, then change and redo the FMs. There must be 60. And you have to have a starting point and a finishing point (basically TKs models), with everything fitting nicely inbetween, from Morane L to the Snipe.

Sorry guitarclassic55, got carried away with the other stuff. There are about 3 files, in download section here http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?autoc...amp;showcat=213 easy to install - just drop the "Aircraft" Folder in the zip into your "Objects" directory. You do need all the 3D models first , thats the hard work. If you don't have them all its ok, dropping the above file will just create a aircraft specific folders with the data ini only, but it won't cause a problem.

The first is an easy one, and is one of the AI changes in EP. BTW, these changes should be done for the Hanriot too. In the [AIData] section, change the line PitchForAltitude=0.01 (or a similar number) to PitchForAltitude=0.0002 for planes with good pitch, ie turn, eg, hanriot PitchForAltitude=0.0008 for planes with less pitch Sometimes, but rarely, somewhere in between (stock camel FM is 0.0004, but I think it should be less) . This fixes the problem you raised sometime ago (with N28) of Autopilot climbing way from the squadron plus what you just wrote, and if its a problem with TKs stock ones, reduce that number for them as well. It doesn't affect anything else. To test, if inclined, do a test flight with a high waypoint, check to see if autopilot climbs around 60mph. If the number is too high, it will try to climb too steeply, speed dropping to stall speed etc. The following variables should always be set to these values (they wouldn't in pre-EP) MinRollHeading=5.0 MaxRollForHeading=15.0 If not set to these values, the AI/autopilot will roll wildly, especially climbing, or alternately not use roll climbing at all - problem keeping formation. The rest are not that simple, but are important. I'll have a look at it, but there isn't actually a set of numbers that work well...each plane needs to be tested, optimised, and earlier planes generally should behave differently, eg, Fokker Es shouldn't roll around the place like Tripes. Another option is to use TKs default values, either by deleting the [AIData] section from the data ini completely (defaulting to that in the Aircraftobject.ini), or copying that to data ini. BUT, PitchForAltitude= should be less then default (PitchForAltitude=0.00087, I think) for planes that have good pitch. It may have been a problem with the stock Fokker Dr1/Camel FMs. But again, TKs default values won't work/weren't designed for the early planes.

Well now we're discussing it in some depth, maybe its time to clarify things. The pre-EP FMs work fine in the EP. Huh? Yes they do, exactly like they did in the pre-EP game, no difference. The environment hasn't changed. The reason I say they feel like c**p is a relative thing - its compared to the new FMs. I can't fly one then the other, the difference to me is too great - but doing FMs is a matter of feel, not numbers, so I'm very sensitive to that, ya know. Others may find it okay. Its why some are saying you can use the previous FMs in the EP. What has changed in the EP (and WOI for that matter) is how TK does the FMs. There are two parts to this. First the forces on the planes are streamlined/done differently and it gives a smoother feel, a lightness, that makes pre-EP FMs feel sluggish. Secondly, as you pointed out, roll and turn is better in the EP, but maybe only 10% or a bit more. I suggest 20% or so increases to offset the sluggish feel on the first point, but really, the plane will then perform better comparatively. Its over compensation if you like. Stalls of course are different, but pre-EP FM stalls should be ok. I say should, because they may not have been done properly, it wasn't important at that time, and they certainly are low. How the AI works has changed. I have no idea what exactly, but its different. Some parameters that worked before don't work anymore, some seem to work differently. You can't use the old ones, but you can say use TKs default ones. This new FM - perhaps best to not talk of a new Flight Engine, its actually the same, except for stalls, damage modelling etc etc etc ... a lot of etc so it is a new Flight Engine , but the environment the plane flies in, the forces on it, are the same - was, without a doubt, developed for the TKs jet sims, not for FE. Just like the first version of FE was based on his previous jet games, and again with different FMs to simulate the early period. TKs Flight Engine/FMs are exceptionally good to be able to adapt to all these periods! Another thing about the new style FM, is that its not complete. TK probably has minimised the changes to minimise the problem of older FMs not working well together with his new FMs - he knows that there is a huge number of FMs done for his jet games over the years, so he's minimised/selected how he's done it. Because that was his aim, for WOI, porting older FMs isn't really difficult. Some difficulties, but not that bad. Its different for FE, because the way FMs were done for the pre-EP FE was different naturally for WW1 planes to the previous jet games FMs for jet planes. Duh, sounds stupid, sorry, its hard explaining. And now its different to what it was, and different of course to the current jet game (WOI) again. But the path isn't the same for preEP to EP as with the jet FMs, and he didn't/couldn't then make it such that the transition of older FMs to the new type of ones as easy probably for both FE and the jet FMs, because the starting and ending position/path of each is different. Does that make sense? He made the right choice of course, but to our detriment. The difference in pre-EP RMs and EP FMs is significant, and there is no easy migration or mods. But I wonder...he could have just done the EP FMs the same as before, stalls/AI different, is all.....I'm not sure why he actually felt he needed to do it. Good reasons no doubt, but why? More changes coming? For stalls to work effectively? Thinks its far better? Sell more? ??? In addition, the new syle FM was developed for the jet games, not FE. It gives the planes more feel, and it makes them smoother at the same time. Good for jets...not so good for WW1 planes really. However, having said that he's done some truly wonderful/difficult work on the WW1 FMs, and the result is you can produce very nice FMs, albeit with considerable difficulty. Probably it will get easier, TK will show other ways of doing it, add more things etc..but at the moment its not easy simulating WW1 planes in this style. Too smooth...and when you try to make it less smooth, you very quickly run into limitations and problems. Again, not so with the jet FMs. No problems at all. Finally, TK has said that this a transition FM .... another will come down the track, with Vista. He's indicated that transition (existing FMs to new FM style) will be more difficult. I hate to think what this means for FE FMs, when he was talking about jet FMs, given the more difficult transition we have now. So, you have to wonder.... And some questions I have asked myself ... Is the new FM the best one for FE? Are they that much better than the old ones, because it is probably far far easier just redoing stalls and AI for the pre-EP FMs and using them in the EP. And redo the Camel and Dr1 as per the old style - not as stupid as it sounds, the continous climb on these is driving me nuts . Is it worth redoing all the FMs to find TK releases a new type FM (on the other hand, he may not bother for FE...EP1 may be the first and the last EP). The answer to this is definitely not, at least right now. Not for me, anyway. I won't be going back and doing them all (you never know tho). Some more yes, maybe, but all the way back...no. Hidden in this are a whole range of choices - for me, for everyone. Perhaps its best to just redo the AI and stalls on the pre EP FMs for say the 1915- mid 1916 period and use that in a install of a EP game. For earlier type planes its viable, they should feel different. Its a far easier solution. The problem is mailny the transition planes, the Halb/Dh2/N11, but not too many. Still, starting to sound complex. Maybe redo stalls, AI for all pre-EP FMs. Just use that. Thats simpler. Redo camel/dr1. Just move all the stuff from the pre-EP game to the EP game. It will work pretty much as before tho AI stuff should change. This is what basically will happen to those that haven't purchased the EP, but upgrade when TK makes the improvements available via a patch. Or move on, and do what you can with this one in terms of new FMs? The last is basically what I thought, but I have to say I'm having second thoughts about it all. I'd be interested what others think. Specifically about the new FMs. Are they better? Much better/marginally better? Obviously from a point of view of moving forward going with the EP is the way to go, but, really, realistically, its probably not going to go too far doing all new FMs. Arrrggg...all this probably makes little sense.

Oops, sorry, forgot Firecage's campaigns. :blush2: Yes, they are as good as it gets for campaigns in FE. I know a lot of people enjoyed them. But try Charles' ones as well - he did two, I think. 1) Would be a large undertaking, maybe not possible without access to the code?? But who knows. 2) Yes, for the present. It will change, but may take some time. I think most of us were quite happy with the game as it was previously - it worked well. We just hoped TK would improve stalls and a few other things, not, you know, change everything!. But if you now fly the EP, its sorta hard to fly the planes in the previous version, they are quite different. For early war, that may be okay tho... Cheers

Hi Baltika, On the Flight Engine stuff, you are on the right track. But... You should use WOI for WW2, not FE. Reasons: - the Flight Engine is the same (its the FMs that are different, you can do the FMs any way you want) - FE is probably a reduced version of WOI, possibly much of the code is commented out. I'm guessing this, as biplanes require very effecient code to render smoothly - they are angular with bits and pieces sticking out in all sorts of ways, unlike jets. And you would need some stuff that may not work in FE - radar, flaps, you have jets etc etc. - TK may not continue supporting FE for too long. I doubt its a big money earner, and it does require a lot of extra work. Who knows, but your safer with WOI. But as I said you are on the right track about the FMs, IMO. I guess the current WW2 mods were developed from TKs jet sims, before FE. I have looked at some WW2 FMs, and my view is that much that is done in FE (pre EP as well) is far more suitable for WW2. And you are right that the new Flight Engine, and many aspects of the FMs done by TK for FE are very suitable for WW2. Actually, the new Flight Engine is superb for prop planes. Really superb. You get a lot of feel and a lots of motion. The difficulty in FE with the new FMs is that the motion is done in very sensitive way thru necessity, and its making it hard to do FMs. But for WW2 planes, they don't need to be so sensitive, they should be be smoother/aerodynamically streamlined. It would be easier, and work very well. Cheers

He he, I already increased the climb on TKs originals by about 30% or more!......it was the major reason for redoing them. Appreciate your comments and its good to discuss, we don't seem to do this much on this forum, ie, comparative performance of planes, historically and in game. I don't know why. So this time, the long story . Happy to be contradicted....just my opinion. Okay? The Albs didn't climb well. The camel outclimbed the AlbD3 (160hp) by about 20 % (a comparatively significant advantage), the later Alb D3s with bigger engines were not any better in this respect and certainly less manoeuvrable. The Alb Dvs had even less climb than the D3s. Less agile too. Somehow there is a perception that Albs climbed well, but say, didn't roll well. Its how I've seen them done often. I think its the converse. The Alb D3 160 hp was probably the best Alb. But it had structural problems (I doubt many pilots dived this plane, tho the OAW built version apparently didn't suffer structural failures), and bigger engines meant better performance at higher altitudes and higher ceilings - that was where the advantage was from mid 1917, and the reason heavy inline engines of increasing power were used for Albs, and indeed every other plane on both sides. Rotaries didn't perform well at altitude - some planes with rotaries were the exception, largely due to very low wing loads (hence likely easy to fly, low stalls and very agile planes too - Pup, Snipe, Hanriot). So i doubt ZnB tactices were used by Alb pilots, say compared to se5 and Spad pilots. The AlbDvs had structural problems too. I have tested the Albs extensively in the game. You can on initial pass or with some speed gathered, just outclimb a camel, only just. And use that to win a dogfight. But if the Camel gets on your tail, which it will in an turning fight, its almost impossible to shake them. So the Albs can beat a camel. They can't outclimb the Se5 and Spad, but can with some difficulty out-manoeuvre them. Flying the Albs against this opposition is hard, but really I have survived many dogfights (currently ALbs are my favourites), but its always a challenge. It probably was too in real life. BTW, they are quite ferocious AI if you underestimate them. What you haven't seen, is that the Alb D3 completely dominates the earlier allied planes, with maybe only the Nieup 17 a challenge. Tripe and Pup are later planes, both better. I have all the other stuff going, whether I ever (I mean that) finish the early planes is another matter. At moment as AI for me they are fine, and I need them for testing. I agree about multi-engined bombers, they seem to work okay in the EP. Don't feel great to fly, but yep, as AI they are fine. Cheers

Hi themightysrc, Probably wise decision about the EP at this point in time... I wonder myself. Yes, I can say, hand on heart, its ratchets the difficulty level up very considerably. Among the best AI in any flight sim. The only complaint you could really make is that it may be too tough,eg, in a campaign...you wouldn't survive long. See below for more on this. There are two other benefits using my FMs for the pre-Expansion pack game: - there is a consistency in plane performance from early 1915 right thru to the end of war. In some ways that was my major achievement....it wasn't there at all initially. So, you know, the Dh2 is better than the Fokker E3, not as good as the Alb D2, and the AlbD3 is better than the AlbD2 etc. - the game had huge issues with the AI flying properly (fixed in EP) - they would stall, loop, go in circles. My FMs pretty well were built to fix this aspect, and it did. I must have spent about 90% of my time on the FMs making sure that they didn't do all this. Its easy to install these FMs, just a couple of minutes. Probably wise to back up your aircraft folder before doing this. Congrats on getting all the other stuff, its a huge effort. On a more general note, they are consistent only in Hard FM mode. And hard is hardly hard in that game. Stalls didn't work well in that game (again fixed in EP), so stalls were kept low. I'd also recommend you change the mg effectiveness - it improves the game significantly too - there's a thread somewhere here on this. If you are interested and can't find it, I can give you my files or a link to the thread. Re FE and where it stands in the crowd (I read some of your previous posts), its a great game, but limited. Its great in all the planes we have, the quality of the planes/cockpits, easy to run on most computers, huge dogfights, fantastic AI, very good FMs (due to TKs excellent Flight Engine, its hugely more sophisticated than RBD3 and OFF for example). Its pretty woeful on campaigns, tho a couple Charles did (cambrai etc) are decent. Its just not a strong point in FE. I mainly play custom missions (easy to do say 12 Alb D3s versus 12 Dh2s, or any combination of numbers and planes), with quick missions and instant action for variety. In the campaign respect, and hence perhaps overall immersion, RBD3 and OFF leave FE for dead. I play both FE and OFF. Neither provides it all. But each does one part well. Seemss like you play RBD3, which overall is the best, just dated, unfortunately - a truly great game in its time. Cheers

Yes I am - its a bit lonely TKs too. Some are underdone performance wise. How is online going? Have't heard a lot about this lately.

Thought I'd add my bit (a long bit really ) about the new Flight Engine and compatability issues. I know lots play TKs other games, so first, just want to say although Wings over Israel uses the same new Flight Engine as the First Eagles Expansion Pack, in terms of pre versus new Flight Engine FM issues/problems, they are chalk and cheese. I tried WOI (great game, BTW), loaded some earlier user-made FMs for the previous Flight Engine and did some FMs too :yes: (its very easy modding these, as it is modding TKs WOI FMs too). Basically the early FMs work pretty well in the new game. To get them to TKs WOI standard can be done progressively. New AI data (or using TKs existing default stuff) is probably essential, changing performance a bit (pitch and especially roll) would be advisable. You wouldn't really even need to redo the stalls. To go the whole hog, redo them with the new stuff, it is better....but I have to say its not difficult or complex. I don't mean to say that doing jet FMs is easy - the avionics is far more complex, theres more in the jet FMs like lift devices, various power mechanisms, and of course the "thrill" and challenge is to try to accurately model correct and published performance data - not trivial. BUT, in terms of porting/modding existing FMs, its easy. TK has said as much on his WOI forum, and its true. FE on the other hand.....ahhhhhhhh!!!! .......its completely different. I think I understand why, but won't try to explain. Suffice to say, my guess is it was also quite a challenge for TK as well. FE FMs compatablity....... You shouldn't use pre-EP FMs. They fly like c**p in the EP. The AI is completely different and also c**p. Stalls won't work, and are too low anyway. Some pre-EP FMs may also cause issues with your game - the new Flight Engine is very sensitive to some things we have done in FE. If you really have to use the pre-EP FMs, you know, gotta have the N11 etc, this is what you can do. Delete the AI data section in the FM - it will then use TKs default (in the Aircraftobject.ini). In the control surfaces section at end of data ini increase roll (cldc) and pitch (cmdc) numbers by 20-30% to get equivalent EP performance, ie, less sluggish. Stalls won't work properly at all, and the plane will still fly like c**p, but at least performance wise and as AI they will be similar to TKs. Needless to say I don't recommend this. If you want to fly all the planes, you are better off just sticking to the pre-EP game. They all work well in that environment. So whats the best solution for the EP??? Actually, there is only one..........to do all the FMs from scratch. You can't use anything from the pre-EP game. At all. It doesn't work. This is a mistake I made several times along the way... the pre and EP FMs seem similar, but they aren't. Really really unfortunately, doing all of them again is not easy - actually its far harder than it should be IMO. Its not just the sheer number of addon planes. Its also the complexity (or perhaps more accurately, limitations) of the new Flight Engine as it applies to First Eagles. They are very hard and time consuming to do - at least 5 to 10 times as long to do a good one compared to pre-EP FMs. Of course this may get easier over time, with experience, and with new ways of doing FMs that can be then reused etc, but still......at the moment, I spend hours on hours changing a few numbers by miniscule amounts with this either "making or breaking" the FM. Its tricky.... almost unbelievably so. It was not like this at all before. Yes, thats right, you guessed it, I am very frustrated by it all. And I don't have the time I had last year. On a more positive side, if the EP FMs are done well, they are lots better than the previous game. ...and an real dream to fly IMO. And of course the AI are better, and we have stalls/spins. I also noticed in WOI, TK has introduced a seemingly true torque variable for gyro stuff, I presume, though it isn't yet enabled, so maybe he's going to introduce this to FE - no point really in WOI? So maybe its worth continuing, pursuing. I am progressing redoing all the EP FMs I have uploaded, and some new ones, as well as optimising the ai stuff for TKs planes - of TKs, some are redone, and the current versions are definitely better than previously uploaded, and maybe even better than TKs for feel - obviously better in terms of relative performance and AI . 99% there, but that 1% seems to be taking forever... And then there are all the others to be done!! But, the current crop do look good, to me at least. To be honest, have had reservations about all this, uploading anything anymore, and still have. So not promising anything. But to me the game is a mess FM-wise at the moment, it may be getting easier for me doing FMs for the EP, and I probably will do it all for myself at least in the end in any case - I do like the game, I do like the WW1 period, and I love all the addon models we have.

Great work Laton. look brilliant. Thanks for all the work in finishing these "must have" planes. Have a good holiday!!

Very nice gambit as always. Glad your doing Italian variants - with a bit of luck we may get the planes and skins etc to make this a viable theatre. Looking forward to the N24s too. Cheers, and thanks.

mmmm Reran the original mission (my aidata, Aircraftobject.ini, flying AlbD3 vs Spads). Result was a bit different. 3AlbD3s and 3 Spads lost. Now this doesn't sound that different, but it was watching the AI....and I used autopilot the entire time. The planes jinked proficiently, but many of the attackers had trouble lining up shots... as you stated, but not as pronounced. 1 AlbD3 pilot shot down 2 planes. The other may have been a collision. So as tailspin said, the skill level is probably a major factor. As its a custom mission I set the AI skill level on both sides to excellent....meaning they would be a mix of Aces/Vets some average usually, I guess. In the second rerun there must have been less skilled pilots (it certainly looked like it to me). In campaigns and single missions (as against custom missions), the skill profile would be lower. You can improve the AI by copying say the average level to the green level (they will be the same then, but you'll hardly notice other than they are tougher generally), or something similar. I'm certain that will improve AI vs AI outcomes, if it is bugging you. Either TKs or my Aircraftobject.ini. it could be too, that in my aircraftobject.ini, the lower skill level AI may comparatively be better at evading (good for Human player) than they are at being aggressive or capable or good shots .... maybe unbalanced in terms of AI vs AI. Not sure, but I'll look at it more, so thanks for heads up. And...this is guess...but it could be... that the AI that target the human player, at least initially in a furball, are the more capable AI (my experience in that first dogfight, he sure seemed like an Ace!). This for example is definitely true in Il2 - the Aces or Vets follow the player around in furballs like hounddogs, just waiting for that opportunity, often ignoring other planes. In IL2 you can set skill levels for planes, and therefore know from their IDs, who's who in the zoo. Its all pretty complex.

I'd agree that the AI is effective in shooting the human player down - often just a couple of shots. The rest....well, doesn't happen in my game for some reason. After reading your post I did a 12 Alb D3s vs 12 Spad 150s custom mission - both planes have my AI data, and the same Aircraftobject.ini as I posted. The result was after 10 mins 8 AlbD3s were lost, 6 Spads were downed. In a AlbD3 I downed one Spad only - I had a very determined opponent, took most of the time to shake him from my tail, then get the better of him, then after 6 mins switched to autopilot. In the team, 5 different AlbD3 AI pilots downed 1 Spad each. I watched 3 different dogfights in that last 4 mins on autpilot, and they were very good to watch - the AlbD3s and Spads were evenly matched. In one pair the Spad had the upper hand and kept it, and I watched him shoot down the Alb very proficiently, but the AlbD3 jinked well too. In the other two pairs the fights turned and twisted with one ,then the other getting the advantage and taking shots. I watched these 3 seperate dogfights finish - all in the last 4 mins. I then ran the same mission in my stock install - TKs Aircraftobject.ini and AI data. The end result wasn't much different. 10 Albs and 6 Spads lost after 12 mins. But I shot down 1, and wasn't chased deteminedly by EA, shooting them down was lots easier, just got bored so didn't try for more. I suppose the AI versus AI result is similar with TKs and mine from this quick test (tho not for human). I'd say this is because my AI are more aggressive/proficient, but this is also offset as they are better at evasion too! Balanced. As TKs are. As long as you use one set or the other. A couple of other things I have noticed in furballs are firstly, that the planes maintain altitude far better than before - they don't go to ground as in previous version - which is very good, a major improvement. And secondly, a lot of dogfights end up as 1:1s or 1:2/3s etc - planes seem to get scattered everywhere in small groups and slug it out. I think (not sure) this is both different and better than before. Perhaps this is a reason why rejoins don't work effectively - they are widely scattered. Doesn't help you I know, but ....maybe others have different experiences, and we can guess/identify/fix if necessary what this is.

Available in Downloads section (or should be shortly). http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?autom...amp;showcat=213 Not much to say here about these - its all in the Readme. And you should read that this time round. Been away for a few weeks, so just catching up with everything. But couple of things... TKs new flight model is great. Far and away the best yet for WW1 planes around. Actually, really suitable for any prop plane, you can do a lot in terms of feel/motion. But they are awfully hard to do and get right, it takes a large amount of time, mainly tweaking, and then tweaking and tweaking. Everything has to be just right. I've got the hang of it I'd say, but yet still, progress is slow. I doubt TK will change the flight model or AI in a patch. On further testing and playing, everything seems fine. I do hope he fixes the many gaphical issues tho. And does a weapons/gun editor soon - the damage inflicted by mgs is arcadish. And hope he includes a blipping sound Anyway, have fun, and let me know if there are any issues. I won't update these particular FMs again for a while, but it'll be good to know what you think, and of course, if there are major issues, I will look at them.