Polovski

If you installed any mods incorrectly or edited files you may get this issue too. We'd need more info, but best clean all things out first, there's help in the FAQ to remove everything, See 2) here: http://www.overflandersfields.com/FAQ.htm#Known_Issues Also make sure you properly patched according to this (in the FAQ): http://www.overflandersfields.com/FAQ.htm#Installation_and_settings

Or just hang on for P4 :) hint if you look in the mission file generated you can see which craft are used for you or your squad etc. You would need to delete any .bdp file after any FM changes btw. FM uses both .cfg and .air files but .air is main one and CFS3 may override or even add other settings into .cfg from the .air file. Some settings are used from the .cfg file always (such as contacts). Good eh? ;)

Did you try just installing by using "run as administrator" on the installer?

Guys, can you take it to a different thread to talk about the historical details ta

You'll enjoy Wodin, .. you can also bung it on your headphones if you use those.

Thanks guys, no BH we fixed them in those positions although yes in rl you can slide somewhat. Not sure how easy in combat but anyway the arc is very generous and up/down too you can fire forward and pretty much fully rear with both. We mounted one more forward than the other. P4 has a few surprises for gunners too.

As Promised a few new screenshots from Phase 4 German craft, Aviatik and some updated Albatros for your viewing pleasure... Enjoy Olham, ;) http://combatace.com/topic/64931-phase-4-development-screenshots-merged/page__st__40__p__529595#entry529595

Lol Carrick, the same pictures were posted here first in the stick thread in this forum! http://combatace.com/topic/64931-phase-4-development-screenshots-merged/page__st__20

Wow tricky one not heard of that but worth recording here for others thanks 33LIMA

They are super Lou well done. Arto has already done the medals for P4 and they are stunning too so I think we are Ok for now WM.

Yeah just a typo in the links fixed Olham.

Thanks guys, there's a few more added.

We are running around doing many things so I can't comment on all the points and questions, but the player uses _SQD and _QC1 models in the aircraft folder normally. HTH

Hi Olham, the window was covered with a Celluloid type covering. It often faded or went brown with time. The black instrument is a pitot tube to measure air speed.

New pics posted in the sticky screenshot thread. Single seater Strutter updated: http://combatace.com/topic/64931-phase-4-development-screenshots-merged/page__view__findpost__p__528722 NEW ITEMS COMING IN PHASE 4: SEARCHLIGHTS, AIRFIELD TORCHES http://combatace.com/topic/64931-phase-4-development-screenshots-merged/page__view__findpost__p__528741 Enjoy.

No, AI craft and player craft of an aircraft type use the same settings from the same XDP files. If to some it seems to use different settings I have no idea why. Note if you mod one, you need to mod ALL copies of that model to be the same or yes, you will see different things from AI flown craft and player craft. We try to get some kind of realistic behaviour by using more realistic commonly used arc areas i.e. where the gunner may usually fire from in normal use. Yes we have to restrict the arcs in some craft differently to give a better overall experienc and balance for certain craft. AI does not feel G forces for example and has no idea what a "fuselage" is on your craft ;). You would die all the time approaching an unrestricted AI arc. Phase 4 is totally different but we shall see :). 4. On the gun mounts; of course we know how real ones worked but making extra pivots and new ways to move is too much work currently too many issues would arise. There are many odd mounts too that would all need special code and animation to cope with (for example some craft have odd mounts or multiple mounts with 1 gun). P5 or P78 maybe if we don't shoot ourselves with the modded gun mounts first.

Lol Olham, we are full of surprises eh?

It doesn't "cheat" in that way and as far as I know uses the same code for gunners aiming if you are in the craft as pilot or not, but as many didn't like the fact that gunners could shoot down through their own tail we had to limit it some (was a poll at some point I think). So it is what it is. AI isn't clever like a human we take so much for granted that a human does, but when you come to make a computer think or behave like a human it's very difficult and detailed. There usually no "ooo there's a tail in the way and it's mine, perhaps I'd better not shoot it off". There's so much to it when you delve in (BH will know this I am sure). Anyway just a note P4 is a whole different ball game ...

NOD32 for me all day long superb program used it for many years, extremely low resources and good protection.

Some good things in there at least :) BTW silly accidents even at low speed can kill people we know that from all things in life. Even just falling over can kill. IIRC one of Cecil Lewis' friends was taxing on the airfield and was killed when his craft hit a pot hole and flipped. All those bullets with intent did nothing, but a simple pot hole on the ground got him.

No worries HPW there will be errors even though we check and recheck stuff as we go, always unexpected ways to mess things up let alone the human brain fuzzing! Yes BH I'm sure you have had those moments, I wouldn't care if I hadn't spent so long trying things out checking for wheels on the ground thousands of, and then wing scrape tests etc. Problem was going back to older backups was no good as it had been corrupting for some time :/

There are 209398484 amounts (+/-) of data to check and several human errors in contact points is unavoidable. Also all that going through 3+ versions of OFF and the fact that each one has to be measured and entered manually including x,y,z and +/- to indicate direction and with slightly varing models variants. Just the contacts alone (and the 2000 tests per craft) where enough to drive me insane let alone the FM testing. Also through 20 or 30 or can't remember versions of AirWrench (a fantastic program by Jerry, but like all good programs still has some bugs over the years). At some point Airwrench unfortunately actually altered many numbers of contacts due to a bug which copied the PREVIOUS aircraft contacts cfg settings to the next one. Boy that was a joyous moment discovering that and then redoing them ALL It will make NO difference to any issue above if you adjust the upper wing contact by .3 of a meter believe me. When we come to check things like contacts again send me anything you find HPW please, much appreciated.

Yeah plus the sesqui-wing on the Noops and later in the Albatros gives a goodish down view to compensate. Some might have a super windscreen but horrible wing placements (DH5 great forward, awful behind) or engine (DFW cough).

The screens are as they were, and the heads are placed where they should be. Many of the Nieuports' windows you could not fold down, and they were cramped. Try zooming out a notch or two with [ ] keys? or change the FoV in workshop. Or press F3 and have a totally uncluttered view. Nice and easy but not realistic but we can't change them without changing the aircraft to something it wasn't? For me this is the whole point of flying WW1 - tasting the difficulties pilots had to deal with back, when you cannot trim out many craft, or they are often poor view, (Dh5 rear?) poor power (Pup), with poor guns (most early Allied!) and us poor sods have to fly these deathtraps ;) Try the DFW if you really want to see what a poor view is like ! With TIR it helps you can move around some, plus you can lean in to the glass to see more or move back etc. Or press F4 to get an outside view for ultimate comfort :) Once you have oil soaked goggles in the 100mph wind I'm sure the real one would quiet be tricky too so at least we don't have that to deal with I guess.

That's fine if you are happy, but I totally disagree with that for TrackIR at least. If you are moving that far with your eyes and head then you need to adjust the sensitivity up a lot. It should be a subtle movement of your real head - mine I move about an inch either side to look fully right left so don't notice it. Set it with a suitable dead zone area to avoid twitches moving the view too much. You can also have an exponential curve so as you move more the on screen head increases movement. After a week or so you should not even think or notice the TIR being there. If you do then it needs adjusting more. Maybe some of the free ones need more tweaking don;t know I can only refer to TrackIR. The fact you can look over the side and down looking for aircraft or targets or when landing, or lift your head and look over the wing in an instant or track an aircraft yourself even ducking under a wing to see, or lean trying to REALLY align the gun sight to your moving target - so many things make it so much more realistic. These all help to avoid the static view effect. But each to his own. Almost everyone who tries TrackIR finds it amazing but occasionally someone doesn't like it that's fine but I wouldn't let that put the vast majority off from enjoying it.