Jump to content

US93_Larner

Members
  • Content Count

    1075
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by US93_Larner

  1. And to think, No.24 is a borrowed ship! Definite KP duty.
  2. During the fly-in? Odd. I saw lots of players.
  3. New 3rd Pursuit Group USAS skins are here (US93, US103). Current link you have is outdated - we don't use those skins anymore!!!! JG1's FC skins are here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ah9909uyne0zdpa/2020-0605_JG1FCPP.zip?dl=0
  4. Thanks again to J5 et al for setting up the communal awards system - it's added a great element to the community and chasing those medals was tons of stress fun! The prospect of eventually getting my paws on the 'Big One' certainly influenced my flying and added a whole new element to the game! There were plenty of pulse-quickening moments along the way - to be exact, my ship caught fire on no less than two occasions and somehow survived three collisions (two in Hunland, which I only just managed to glide back to my lines from!). Thankfully, despite all the Hun bullets I've caught over the last few months, she never broke apart on me in the air, even after the new DMs were introduced! I must just be lucky ๐Ÿ˜‰ Salute to the Bosches, who never made it easy up there
  5. That pesky "Real World" has been getting in the way! Things over here are starting to stir back into life as the Covid lockdown has been easing, so I've had some catching up to do That being said - I've finally gotten around to getting issue No. 30 of the Chronicle ready! Apologies for the delay, all!
  6. The good thing about the 4.007 DM thread being shut down was that everybody got the chance to let the discussion breathe and get a little more in-game context. Personally, I think the following: 1) In the "weak" planes, you absolutely can keep your wings on, even after being seriously damaged - but, if you have someone engaging you then you essentially have to choose between tame manoeuvres and getting shot in the back, or proper evasive manoeuvres that pull your wings off. 2) Control surface damage still seems to be, just, far, far too frequent. During one training night I was doing a bit of sparring with one of the 103rd guys. We must have had about 20 duels - about 18 of which resulted in me shooting out one or more of his controls, or vice versa, with the first burst that landed. It might not have been clear from my comments regarding the DM in previous discussions, but I actually like the direction the Devs are taking - introducing more complexity and different outcomes to battle damage - I think it's great, and can create a more interesting experience! However, the current implementation of the new features does feel exaggerated to me. At the moment I think the Pfalz and D7 are exhibiting pretty good DM characteristics in the wing-shedding department - they are tough, and can certainly take a few bursts and continue to manoeuvre pretty hard - but doing anything extreme will take your wings off. I'd want to see the other planes come closer to those characteristics. Talbot & I are just about done collecting data from USAS combat reports and other period sources, with illuminating results. We're just working on formatting what we've collected into something presentable!
  7. Yep. Ain't like RoF - those Fs will get ya unless you clear out early enough!
  8. Keep meaning to do it, but keep forgetting! It's pretty amusing - looks like every piece that breaks off the D.VII 'spawns' an extra engine
  9. All dead, I'm afraid! Apart from one, who was just off having lunch ๐Ÿ˜„
  10. Awesome! My fave is "against all odds" I think I was in the middle of that big fur ball - I distinctly remember a very similar scrap and seeing two D.VIIs falling in flames within seconds of each other....and spotting a certain sky blue Camel in amongst the excitement Ended up cooking another D.VII down low before high-tailing it home! Ah, wasn't the old DM such fun?
  11. Bullshit. EVERY KNOWN SOURCE proves that the SPAD could easily withstand a bird strike. This needs fixed now.
  12. Yeah, just fired it up to look at some skins I'm working on...defo updated
  13. I think we should all pool our research together and write a book on combat damage during WW1 dogfights...raise some money for 1C to release FC Vol. 2
  14. Cheers! As the books are written by the same authors (minus Nigel McCrery) I would imagine they are very similar in content and thoroughness of analyses. All claims were analysed in as much depth as possible by Franks and Giblin - any outcome that was not definitively referenced (I.E, aircraft merely reported to have been "shot down" or to have "fallen") are included in the data I gathered as 'not specified', and any results that are very likely to have NOT resulted in the loss of an aircraft weren't recorded. Of course, the 'not specified' pool could all be cases of aircraft coming apart. Conversely, none of them could be. I would have to think that a pilot would not hesitate to report an aircraft as having fallen to pieces, as it would surely be more credible than merely reporting it as "shot down". On the subject of well-documented claims - Gorrell's history of the AEF contains a mass of original combat reports of pilots of the U.S. Air Service. Talbot and myself are currently working on analysing these as well, as we think they could be an important resource in determining the 'historical plausibility' of an aircraft going to pieces, most especially in the case of Flying Circus, as the USAS were operating at the right period in time - and, of course, not all reporting pilots are crack-shot Aces like the Baron and the 'Other Huns'! I see what you're saying with the term 'rarity'. Actually, just about an hour ago I found a page in Flying Fury in which McCudden describes shooting the wings off of an Albatros. Just like you say, he made no reference of this being a surprise to him. - in that case, would 'comparative rarity' be a better-fitting term?
  15. How hasn't it? From your MvR analyses and my analyses of the other Aces, I got a figure of 7% of all shoot-downs definitively being from structural failure - or 21 cases out of 302. That seems to me to be fairly indicative that an aircraft breaking up was a rarity. Could you elaborate a little on why you don't think the same?
  16. Yes. Although rare it did happen, so of course it should be in the game if we're looking for realism. However, at the moment in the case of several aircraft, structural failure with minimal damage is the rule and not the exception - to the point that I've been legitimately surprised to see a Halberstadt make a flat-turn without falling apart after being hit. Good one. This is exactly what I'm saying about players letting an "Us vs Them" mentality overshadow any actual worthwhile opinion they might have. The reality is that you are making assumptions that Entente players are exaggerating or 'whining' with absolutely ZERO context as to how the DM affects the Entente planes (and the Halb / Alb). You don't even have the context of fighting against Entente aircraft in MP as you continue to remain offline. Instead of actually speaking from any point of personal experience or perception, you'd rather just claim that the Entente pilots are crying about a non-issue while blindly taking the word of anyone here that says anything that aligns with that idea. If you took some of the "weak" planes out in MP and then came back in here and gave your opinions based on your flights, that would be much more credible. I think the same! No problem with controls being cut - it did happen with enough frequency to be noticeable in a lot of the literature - but it wasn't anywhere near as common as it is in FC if the accounts are to be believed! Not trying to refute this in any way, but just a consideration to make - how many noobie FC camel pilots do you think the Gyro effect has killed in a low alt dogfight? The difference is that the FC guys can keep respawning and retrying until they're Camel Masters However way you look at it, I think the current DM allows the Central faction to Spray n Pray and see good results, whereas the Entente side largely has to rely on firing for the meat-n-metal, which I think is going to affect the MP experience quite significantly and cause a lot of frustration. The Central side also basically now have to rely on their recons / bombers never being seen at all in order to complete their missions, as one burst will just blow their wings off. There are a lot of interesting points for the Historical arguments surrounding the DM, but in regards to the Gameplay argument I think it's fairly clear that this is going to has hurt Multiplayer.
  17. The vast majority of the Aces' kills didn't break up. All the claim analysis so far has already covered that a structural break-up was a rare occurrence. This brings us back round to the "Players are flying too aggressively in FC" argument...
  18. Boelcke on Boelcke violence. The world is a sad place...
  19. In which we attempt to get out from under the shadow of our more famous colleagues in the 103rd ๐Ÿ˜‰
  20. Spot on. Also spot on ๐Ÿ˜ข
  21. The 103rd are joined by myself and Klaiber (of JG1) for some FiF fun - here are the highlights!
×
×
  • Create New...