Potential exploit of current gamemechanics - needs fixing

[SR-F_Winger]

Opinions greeatly welcome here. And i also open a poll for that.

I really apprechiate the fact that one can lean out of the plane when the canopy is open.

However being able to do so while being chased with an IAS of 300+ kph is just plain wrong and gives the player that does it an unfair advantage over every other player that doesnt do so. Its important to point out that i am NOT saying this should be fixed only for russian planes since CURRENTLY those are the only ones that feature a backslidable canopy. The FW 190 is about to come and will also feature a canopy like that and here it needs just as much to be fixed.

 

As simple fix for that would be to limit headmovement on the X-axis at a given airspeed. No matter if the canopy is open or closed. I mean try to hang your head out of the window during a cardrive with only 200 kph. Current gamemechanics are just plain wrong.

 

 

Edited April 22, 2014 by VSG1_Winger

[J2_Trupobaw]

Isn't increased drag a payoff already? Especially in soviet plane while being chased? 

(Also, I remember reading on this forum than many soviet pilots did prefer to fly with open canopy. This may be case of realism looking unrealistic).

Anyway, another  solution might be to cause mild blackout if head is stuck into airflow. But don't think it's necressary.

Edited April 22, 2014 by Trupobaw

[SR-F_Winger]

Isn't increased drag a payoff already? Especially in soviet plane while being chased? 

 

(Also, I remember reading on this forum than many soviet pilots did prefer to fly with open canopy. This may be case of realism looking unrealistic).

 

Anyway, another  solution might be to cause mild blackout if head is stuck into airflow. But don't think it's necressary.

I dont say flying with open canpopy shall be disallowed. Only being able to stick out your head (at least to the current degree) at those speeds ist unrealistic.

Edited April 22, 2014 by VSG1_Winger

[Original_Uwe]

There really are much bigger problems at this point.

Mountains from molehills.

Besides, it's not like that would be physically impossible. You can stick you're head out of a Blackhawk at 160mph without dying. It's really god-damn unpleasant bit you can do it.

Edited April 22, 2014 by forsale

[SR-F_Winger]

There really are much bigger problems at this point.

Mountains from molehills.

Besides, it's not like that would be physically impossible. You can stick you're head out of a Blackhawk at 160mph without dying. It's really god-damn unpleasant bit you can do it.

I also didnt mention anywhere that it needs Fixing NOW:)

Ill Edit my post. EDIT: Cant anymore:)

 

This evening ill record a video that shows how riddiculously stupid current headmovement at those speeds is. Ill just dive with 700 kph and stick my head out left and right to the limits once after another time and everyone will see what i mean:)

Edited April 22, 2014 by VSG1_Winger

[pixelshader]

There really are much bigger problems at this point.

Mountains from molehills.

Besides, it's not like that would be physically impossible. You can stick you're head out of a Blackhawk at 160mph without dying. It's really god-damn unpleasant bit you can do it.

 

Well, drag increases exponentially, so if it is extremely uncomfortable at 250kph then imagine 350.. 500.. 700

 

I think it would add to the sense of speed and immersion if something happens when you try to stick your head out at that speed.

[Matt]

Loft said in one of the early videos (pre early-access) that they are planning to implement a limitation on this.

 

So just wait and see.

[MarcoRossolini]

Zounds! Mine brilliant plan has been exposed. Being able to stand half way outside the cockpit is the only thing the LaGG truly has going for it. 

 

That said, it is a bit silly, but I'm not sure how they'd implement it in...

[SR-F_Winger]

Loft said in one of the early videos (pre early-access) that they are planning to implement a limitation on this.

 

So just wait and see.

Ah thanks for the headsup. Didnt know that.

[DD_Arthur]

I like the limits we have at present and enjoy rubber-necking the scenery so voted no.  As long as there is a drag penalty I can't really see how this can be called an exploit.  The fact is a 109 pilot, strapped in his seat, would never be able to look around to the extent he can in any combat flight sim we have at the moment, regardless of leaning out of the 'pit.  

Is that an exploit?  

Edited April 22, 2014 by arthursmedley

[Feathered_IV]

ja!

[SR-F_Winger]

I like the limits we have at present and enjoy rubber-necking the scenery so voted no.  As long as there is a drag penalty I can't really see how this can be called an exploit.  The fact is a 109 pilot, strapped in his seat, would never be able to look around to the extent he can in any combat flight sim we have at the moment, regardless of leaning out of the 'pit.  

Is that an exploit?  

Currently the game allows actions that could not be performed like that in real life. Using this "not yet complete" game mechanic can be considered an exploit. Yes.

After all its a "simulation".

[DD_Arthur]

Currently the game allows actions that could not be performed like that in real life. Using this "not yet complete" game mechanic can be considered an exploit. Yes.

After all its a "simulation".

 

But that's just it. All combat flight sims - with the possible exception of RoF - allow a degree of freedom of movement that is unrealistic and could not be performed in real life.   In monoplane fighters the pilot was strapped in to such a degree that he'd never be able to turn his head and have the freedom of movement that TrackIr and snap views gives to all of us.  Isn't this an exploit?

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Limitations YES. You just do not pop out your head going combat speeds without ANY drawback. This will be exploited to hell and back if left as it is.

[sturmkraehe]

I also think it is an unfair exploit of the whole computer stuff that after for instance (as I experienced recently) I shot off the wing of a 109 in multiplayer this player I won't name here just disconnected so that the kill didn't count as happened...

 

BTW I think there are far worse points than that. I am a frequent LaGG flyer because I am just too embarrassed to fly the 109 as it is just too good. I don't use the so-called exploit because it hardly helps anyway. I still haven't automatized to look backwards and lean to the sides well enough with TrackIR to have a real benefit from it because it is just awkward and too time consuming. It is easier to make a little turn to check my six. Turning instead of just looking also has the benefit to have spoiled shortly at least a shooting solution if I really have somebody there (which equates to have made a mistake far earlier and if I spot somebody there it is anyway too late).

Edited April 22, 2014 by sturmkraehe

[Bassly]

 

Yes, there should be some limitations in high speeds or it will be abused later alot.

 

Waiting to see what the devs come up with.

[SR-F_Winger]

But that's just it. All combat flight sims - with the possible exception of RoF - allow a degree of freedom of movement that is unrealistic and could not be performed in real life.   In monoplane fighters the pilot was strapped in to such a degree that he'd never be able to turn his head and have the freedom of movement that TrackIr and snap views gives to all of us.  Isn't this an exploit?

I agree to that. But i also think that there is a point at wich things get riddiculous.

 

@Sturmkraehe: That pilot could have been me:) (not saying it actually WAS me:)). Most of the time when i get damaged that badly i just eject, finfish flight and get a new plane. Sometimes, when i am able to keep flying i just try to escape and finish when i got enough room to call it RTB. Those things will change once we get the big map with missions and stats that count each inflight abandoned plane. Anyhow it actually doesnt matter right now since stats dont count yet anyways. I dont agree that the 109 is too good. Its better than the LAGG. But thats the ways things were and this is actually not the topic here. Also it might change on friday when the G2 comes anlong with the YAK-1. Things will get much more interesting.

[sturmkraehe]

Well, if the 109 isn't too good, the LaGG is too bad but of course it's not the topic here.

 

BTW if done correctly the FW190 should not be able to open canopy in flight. AFAIK it was never constructed to be flown caprio style. I have yet to see a historic picture with a Focke in flight with open cockpit. Actually I think it would be ripped off if tried.

 

 

Winger: go fly the Lagg online (offline does not count) at least a couple of hours.

Edited April 22, 2014 by sturmkraehe

[Volkoff]

But that's just it. All combat flight sims - with the possible exception of RoF - allow a degree of freedom of movement that is unrealistic and could not be performed in real life.   In monoplane fighters the pilot was strapped in to such a degree that he'd never be able to turn his head and have the freedom of movement that TrackIr and snap views gives to all of us.  Isn't this an exploit?

Come to think of it, someone made a mod for the DCS P-51 that restricts head movement, even when using trackir, to a more natural range of motion. I wonder if such range of motion head movement restrictions can just be built into Bos, along with the restrictions that Winger is suggesting?  MJ

Edited April 22, 2014 by =69.GIAP=MIKHA

[HagarTheHorrible]

I agree, but also don't agree.  I also can't believe that someone who fly's predominantly German aircraft can complain about VVS.  With the present plane set the Germans hold the trump card so if the VVS get a bit of a boost, bully for them.

 

I do however agree with you that it is probably unrealistic to stick ones head out of the canopy without penalty as speed increases.  Possibly a simple resolution would be to gradually limit how far your head can be stuck out as speed increases. 

 

If you're going to restrict head sticky outness though then in all fairness increasing "G" loads should also have a negative effect on the  ability to rapidly look around, side to side, up over the shoulder.  Also, if 109's predominantly flew with armoured head rests then that should be the default situation and it shouldn't be removable in the sim just because it helps to look around and anyway virtual life is cheap which negates the advantage of armour anyway so nobody would fly with it if given the option.

[SR-F_Winger]

I agree, but also don't agree.  I also can't believe that someone who fly's predominantly German aircraft can complain about VVS.  With the present plane set the Germans hold the trump card so if the VVS get a bit of a boost, bully for them.

Its not about that. I said in my first post that it has to be done right for ALL planes with in flight openable canopys. No matter the side. Please dont make this about individuals. Its not!

[HagarTheHorrible]

You would, no doubt , also agree that it is an exploit almost exclusively available to VVS aircraft. The 190 is misleading because obviously it has a bubble canopy.

[VSG1_Golfplatz]

calm down boys!

I agree with winger!

[SR-F_Winger]

calm down boys!

I agree with winger!

Noone is upset:) Everyting is fine Golf!

 

Hagar: So the 190 canopy cannot be slided backwards inflight? Allright. I didnt really know that. And even if the LAGG was a german plane. I would have still made up this thread. Believe me.

[sturmkraehe]

Yes, E1. I was about to write the same thing. Now this is as much as an exploit as somebody sticking his head out of the LaGG. I think the canopy of the 109 or 190 only openable (canopy flying away) in flight when getting punishment in terms of additional (noticeable) drag. Also in the 109 it should be similar than sticking out one's head out of the LaGG as the opening is much larcher creating quite a bit of buffeting inside the open cockpit.

Edited April 23, 2014 by sturmkraehe

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Any feature a player can use to get that small advantage will be probed out and used extensively. No matter which plane it is. Has happened in all previous flight sims and will happen in BoS as well. So better drop the VVS vs. LW agenda and focus on how to get those exploits plugged or fixed/tweaked instead. 

[SR-F_Winger]

The 109 canopy can be jettisoned. No longer can you press a key to jettison it but open it and it gets torn off quite effectively.

Nothing stopping the 109 pilot doing that and sticking his head out, if he wanted to. 

It needs to be fixed here as well. However jettisoning the canopy gives you permanent drag malus. Woudl be kind of idiotic if you ask me. Anyways there shoudl be a fix that applys for each and every plane.

[sturmkraehe]

It needs to be fixed here as well. However jettisoning the canopy gives you permanent drag malus. Woudl be kind of idiotic if you ask me. Anyways there shoudl be a fix that applys for each and every plane.

Your last sentence exposes your use of double measure. Oh no, the jettison of 109 canopy is - according to you - no exploit because it adds additional drag. What on Earth makes you believe that opening the canopy of a LaGG does not induce higher drag? Either both things are exploits or they aren't. You have to decide. Otherwise it sounds too much like luftwhining.

Edited April 23, 2014 by sturmkraehe

[LLv44_Mprhead]

Your last sentence exposes your use of double measure. Oh no, the jettison of 109 canopy is - according to you - no exploit because it adds additional drag. What on Earth makes you believe that opening the canopy of a LaGG does not induce higher drag? Either both things are exploits or they aren't. You have to decide. Otherwise it sounds too much like luftwhining.

 

Key word there was "permanent", when your canopy has fallen off, you can't close it again and get rid of that additional drag. So I agree with Winger in that doing so in 109 would not be smart. In other planes again you can get the best of the both worlds, since you can close canopy again when more speed is needed.

[sturmkraehe]

Oh I did read the word "permanent". It is just of very little matter in a dogfight if the additional drag is permanent or only temporary. It is a physical fact that can be proven with a little bit of mathematics (integration) that a speed loss cannot be compensated in sufficient short times to matter in a dogfight unless you have excess acceleration (power for us pilots). Excess power is not a characteristic of the Lagg anyway and likely not for any new Soviet fighter we'll get in BoS. Even a temporary speed loss matters a LOT in a highly dynamical situation such as a dogfight. In other situation drag or no drag does matter nothing. If you are flying sightseeing more drag is of no concern and my guess is nobody would complain here if it was not for some assumed disadvantage when dogfighting.

 

Do I think it should be fixed? Yes! Do I think that a tiny matter of the size of an amoeba is blown up to the size of a Brontosaurus by someone who exclusively flies the noticeable superior fighter in this game? Yes, definitely. 

Edited April 24, 2014 by sturmkraehe

[SR-F_Winger]

Oh I did read the word "permanent". It is just of very little matter in a dogfight if the additional drag is permanent or only temporary. It is a physical fact that can be proven with a little bit of mathematics (integration) that a speed loss cannot be compensated in sufficient short times to matter in a dogfight unless you have excess acceleration (power for us pilots). Excess power is not a characteristic of the Lagg anyway and likely not for any new Soviet fighter we'll get in BoS. Even a temporary speed loss matters a LOT in a highly dynamical situation such as a dogfight. In other situation drag or no drag does matter nothing. If you are flying sightseeing more drag is of no concern and my guess is nobody would complain here if it was not for some assumed disadvantage when dogfighting.

 

Do I think it should be fixed? Yes! Do I think that a tiny matter of the size of an amoeba is blown up to the size of a Brontosaurus by someone who exclusively flies the noticeable superior fighter in this game? Yes, definitely. 

There is only one here that makes big waves:)

A 109 pilot that drops his canopy in a dogfight is just as much of an exploiter as a LAGG pilot that slides his back and puts out his head left right, left right.... in a pursuit with 300 km/h+!

Personally i have never and will never dropy my canopy for other purposes than ejecting.

 

EDIT: And btw. I made a thread with poll about an obvious flaw in game mechanics. I never said that the matter is urgent or needs imminent fixing.

Its the people that start making a discussion "hot" that actually blow up the matter. So just calm a little maybe?

Edited April 24, 2014 by VSG1_Winger

[sturmkraehe]

So why not simply post it in the Bug thread? If you post such a thing (and make a poll out of it) expect that people come to believe that you actually want to discuss it and that is an important feature for you. 

[SR-F_Winger]

So why not simply post it in the Bug thread? If you post such a thing (and make a poll out of it) expect that people come to believe that you actually want to discuss it and that is an important feature for you. 

Could have done that. If it would have come to my mind. Youre right. Might have been the better way. Or not. Now it is the way it is.

Maybe ill do just that next time.

 

Btw. I came across a video on the issue and was just a little annoyed by how this guy used this "feature".

Ill not repost it. I dont want to embarass anyone.

Edited April 24, 2014 by VSG1_Winger

[HagarTheHorrible]

Talking of exploits, at the moment I occasionally fly high and inverted in the LaGG, great view downstairs, and with no blood rushing to my head or carburettor problems for several tens of seconds it's a great way to spot targets for a pounce.

[SR-F_Winger]

Talking of exploits, at the moment I occasionally fly high and inverted in the LaGG, great view downstairs, and with no blood rushing to my head or carburettor problems for several tens of seconds it's a great way to spot targets for a pounce.

Dunno if this works in the 109 as well. Have you checked?

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 DB engines had a dry sump oil system so flying inverted was not a problem and the fuel injection did not suffer either.

[Finkeren]

Talking of exploits, at the moment I occasionally fly high and inverted in the LaGG, great view downstairs, and with no blood rushing to my head or carburettor problems for several tens of seconds it's a great way to spot targets for a pounce.

 

I agree about the lack of blackout due to blood running to the head, but otherwise I can't see any problem that should be fixed. Sure, it might be an exploit, but if everything handles in accordance with historical fact, there is nothing that can and should be done about it. 

[Mikey]

  I don't see the problem with flying with the canopy open unless its for exploiting. some type of limit of how far your can stick your head out and rotate at certain speeds i hope that will happen. i imagine at a 600kmh in a dive you would not be able to stick your head out hte window.

  i fly with the canopy open sometimes so i can see a little better..as in not having to look through window and have clear view when i look left m right. I think if your in a dogfight and you stick your head out the canopy you should be able to get hit and if you do thats your head and your dead!  

[AX2]

NO. 

[Nankeen]

LOL Bassly