S.E.5a Woes

[ST_Catchov]

In my experience it's quite apparent the Se5a's in-game speed at sea level in level flight does not match the specs. I've never been able to get the old girl to 138mph. And it seems this may be across the board for the above kites at least. I don't know why this is. It's a can of worms embedded in a strange kettle of fish. As for the speed discrepancies between RoF and FC  I presume it's due to newer research. But my main beef is that in-game speeds should match the specs (whatever they are). And they clearly don't.

 

But back to the Se5a. Just fix the alarming energy loss issue. Fix that and everything else may fall into place. Whether it's prop pitch or a dud Viper engine (needs an overhaul perhaps) or something else I just don't know. I almost miss the glass engine. 

 

In any case, hopefully Shuttleworth can shed some light.

[No.23_Starling]

On 4/29/2020 at 12:53 AM, emely said:

I think this is so in our circus.

You probably have records of these two cases, could you show them here?

I somehow managed to shoot down one or two enemy planes, but I can’t remember a single 1x1 battle.  There was nothing interesting, smart, beautiful.  I just took advantage of the situation when there are more allies, or when the enemy does not see me.  Even the battle on the video above in the subject, it is difficult to consider 1x1.  Although this is probably the only case where I did not just hit and then ran away.  In the standard plot, at the first attempts to arrange a stellfight, a second D7f appears and makes a sieve from Seva ?

Therefore, it is very interesting to see your victories in vertical maneuvers.

 

I've been doing some recording this week of online encounters following a bit of training with the No.74 chaps. Hope you enjoy!

 

 

[emely]

2 hours ago, No.56_Waggaz said:

 

I've been doing some recording this week of online encounters following a bit of training with the No.74 chaps. Hope you enjoy!

 

You got an interesting video.  Of course, all these tricks work, but the most interesting part starts when you meet guys who shoot accurately and don’t do such stupid things as scissors in front of the nose of SE) You can split once, twice, three times.  And you spend the whole height.  A beginner can be lured into a steep dive so that he breaks his wings, or is lower than you.  But against those who can fly, this does not work as a rule.

Losing height and losing life is often the same thing.  these guys on P3 and D7f just had to fly in a circle in one direction and not let you raise your head ? Any of them could pick up speed and energy better than you, I can’t say why they did not.

I prefer to fight for each meter of height when it comes to combat rather than escape by flight.  Here is one of my first flights to FC, where, using old experience from RoF, I wanted to beat the P3 pilot and be higher than his plane.

https://youtu.be/6t9dxHFhwAw

At 1:05, I realized that this damn box SE loses to the ancient P3 in rate of climb at this speed. This problem cannot be fixed.  It remains to be hoped that the pilots flying behind the central ones will make mistakes that can be used.  When meeting with an equal, or more experienced pilot, the chances of a SeVa pilot winning are very slim.

[No.23_Starling]

1 minute ago, emely said:

You got an interesting video.  Of course, all these tricks work, but the most interesting part starts when you meet guys who shoot accurately and don’t do such stupid things as scissors in front of the nose of SE) You can split once, twice, three times.  And you spend the whole height.  A beginner can be lured into a steep dive so that he breaks his wings, or is lower than you.  But against those who can fly, this does not work as a rule.

Yup. I’ve found the same. One thing I should have said in the vid is that if you’re clearly dealing with a strong German pilot the best thing to do is to disengage. Not to denigrate any of the guys in the vid as some are from good squads, but a lot of the tricks won’t work against the top guys. After a minute it should be clear on their skill level. Still, it’s good to have options 

[emely]

I am sure that these guys are great pilots!  However, we all make the mistakes of "Even Homer sometimes nods." ? I am mistaken very often, almost every time I fly)) For example, a long-standing habit from the old IL2 will return home at a 90 ° course, often leading me to the enemy airfield ?

[No.23_Starling]

Out of interest, does anyone know if the SE has been mentioned in the Russian language forum?

[emely]

On the Russian forum, as well as on this one, all topics with questions are filled with complaints about ww2 planes, bombs, guns and tanks.  We should pray to all our gods that at least the issue with the crystal spars of our wings would be resolved ?

[US103_Baer]

@catchov the SE5a clearly matches it's FC spec LEVEL speed at msl and 2000m. It's one of few, along with d7f, that do.

You have to be at standard air pressure and over sea of course (approx 15m). Autumn Kuban map is the go to for this. 

The other trick with the SE5a is to trim the horizontal stabiliser for level flight at that alt, then you don't get elevator down drag slowing you down when engaging level autopilot.

It will eventually get to 222kph or maybe even 223. 

 

I believe we probably have right engine but wrong prop pitch. Hence acceleration, climb and zoom are all awful, while top speed can be reached slowly in level flight and max revs of 2400 are achievable but only in some sort of descent.

[ST_Catchov]

5 hours ago, US103_Baer said:

 

The other trick with the SE5a is to trim the horizontal stabiliser for level flight at that alt, then you don't get elevator down drag slowing you down when engaging level autopilot.

 

 

Yeah I was using level autopilot. I didn't realise it added drag. I'll try the elevator trim.  

 

Thanks for the tip Baer.

[HagarTheHorrible]

Isn’t the roll rate of the aircraft dependant on the aircraft speed ?  

 

 Maybe it’s just me, but I find that, the more you suck energy and slow down the poorer the roll becomes and because the SE5a sucks energy big time it’s roll rate diminishes accordingly ?  If you end up co-altitude and co-energy with anything then the prospects for an SE pilot become increasingly bleak.  If it’s roll rate, in the game, was so fabulous I can’t understand why everyone isn’t just expounding a flat scissors as the perfect defensive manoeuvre ?

[ST_Catchov]

15 hours ago, No.56_Waggaz said:

 

I've been doing some recording this week of online encounters following a bit of training with the No.74 chaps. Hope you enjoy!

 

 

 

I did enjoy it Waggaz. Very good. Where do the 74 chaps hang? The most enlightening thing for me was the use of the Lewis, Ball-style. Pretty handy for obvious reasons. The problem is, I can't find the command to pull the Lewis down? Did they remove the command in the last update or am I blind? I'm sure I saw it before or am I also mad. And can it be moved incrementally? 

[No.23_Starling]

1 hour ago, catchov said:

 

I did enjoy it Waggaz. Very good. Where do the 74 chaps hang? The most enlightening thing for me was the use of the Lewis, Ball-style. Pretty handy for obvious reasons. The problem is, I can't find the command to pull the Lewis down? Did they remove the command in the last update or am I blind? I'm sure I saw it before or am I also mad. And can it be moved incrementally? 

The 74 boys are on the J5 server a fair bit and usually very helpful on winging up. For the tilted Lewis I believe the control is in the weapons section of the key bindings, likewise on the control for firing the overwing gun alone. I have both mapped to my joystick.

 

Hagar - yes the roll needs a little nose down at low alt. This is another reason why scrapping on the deck is messy and stupidly hard. A well timed scissor works well for snap shooting but you have to practice your accuracy. 

Edited May 4, 2020 by No.56_Waggaz

[Bartman]

1 hour ago, No.56_Waggaz said:

For the tilted Lewis I believe the control is in the weapons section of the key bindings, likewise on the control for firing the overwing gun alone. I have both mapped to my joystick.

 

Like catchov I thought I had seen the key binding for tilting the Lewis gun too, but I can't find it now! I just checked the Weapon section of the key bindings but I'm darned if I can see it!

[HagarTheHorrible]

L/Shift + C

[SeaW0lf]

On 5/2/2020 at 10:33 PM, US103_Baer said:

Did go through this when investigating the SPAD. FC and RoF have interesting spec changes and variation against in-game performance. 

 

 

What tests are those? From my tests, for example, the Spad 13 gets to 209km/h at 2000m (ROF), not 189/km/h. That's 20km/h difference. 

The D7F gets to 211km/h at 2000m (ROF), not 191km/h. On the D7F the data makes no sense, since the altitude throttle gives more speed as she climbs, not the opposite.

 

 

On 5/2/2020 at 11:35 PM, catchov said:

In my experience it's quite apparent the Se5a's in-game speed at sea level in level flight does not match the specs.

 

I can get to 220km/h at the autumn map (ISA standard), which is a bit better than the 218km/h indicated on the specs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

-------

 

Also, today I did some tests with the SE5a in both ROF and Flying Circus, and I think, so far, they behave very similarly, but I would give a slight advantage to the SE5a in FC.

 

Both were made in a map with 15ºC temperature and 760 pressure (?). The ISA standard.

 

What I did was simple. Bounce dives. I start flying at sea level and pulling the stick in an upward / steep curve until I stall. Then I dive again to up to 5/10m of altitude and climb again, repeating the process until I can climb to more than 320m in altitude.

 

At the second / third bounce, the plane is around 270 / 290km/h when it reaches sea level, and when I pull up (steep), I can reach 320/340m altitude.

 

Observations:

 

The SE5a in FC gives me the impression that I can reach 290km/h more easily than in ROF, when I really need to do a steep dive. In FC I also seem to reach 340m in altitude more easily. I think I got to 350m once. (you have to determine the stall, because if you do a smooth climb she'll climb forever and then the numbers will be skewed).

 

I also did bounce dives and left ascending exits, almost a half-loop doing a u-turn, and I also think they did very similar.

 

The impression I got is that the SE5a in FC cannot be said to retain less energy than in ROF. If I were to give an opinion, I would say that the SE5a in FC has a slight advantage, especially in acceleration in the dives.

 

It was just initial tests, but if the SE5a in FC were noticeably worse, I think I would notice. The two tests (diving with a straight climb and diving with a left climb) do not represent all aspects of the vertical fight, but at least I could not see any degradation of the SE5a's performance in FC, on the contrary. I think she is slightly better, perhaps because of the new atmosphere that we have in FC, one of the positive things we felt when we got here.

 

Anyway, anyone who is curious can do these tests. The Mixture of the SE5a in FC was 86%. In ROF it has no value, so I had to adjust it visually, but it would also be around 85/87%.

 

Also take into account the placebo effect of the sound effects and graphics.

 

Also take into account the different angles that everyone will put on the planes, so the result is a comparison of you flying in ROF and FC, not against other players' tests. 

Edited May 4, 2020 by SeaW0lf

[HagarTheHorrible]

44 minutes ago, SeaW0lf said:

 

What tests are those? From my tests, for example, the Spad 13 gets to 209km/h at 2000m (ROF), not 189/km/h. That's 20km/h difference. 

The D7F gets to 211km/h at 2000m (ROF), not 191km/h. On the D7F the data makes no sense, since the altitude throttle gives more speed as she climbs, not the opposite.

 

 

 

I can get to 220km/h at the autumn map (ISA standard), which is a bit better than the 218km/h indicated on the specs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

-------

 

Also, today I did some tests with the SE5a in both ROF and Flying Circus, and I think, so far, they behave very similarly, but I would give a slight advantage to the SE5a in FC.

 

Both were made in a map with 15ºC temperature and 760 pressure (?). The ISA standard.

 

What I did was simple. Bounce dives. I start flying at sea level and pulling the stick in an upward / steep curve until I stall. Then I dive again to up to 5/10m of altitude and climb again, repeating the process until I can climb to more than 320m in altitude.

 

At the second / third bounce, the plane is around 270 / 290km/h when it reaches sea level, and when I pull up (steep), I can reach 320/340m altitude.

 

Observations:

 

The SE5a in FC gives me the impression that I can reach 290km/h more easily than in ROF, when I really need to do a steep dive. In FC I also seem to reach 340m in altitude more easily. I think I got to 350m once. (you have to determine the stall, because if you do a smooth climb she'll climb forever and then the numbers will be skewed).

 

I also did bounce dives and left ascending exits, almost a half-loop doing a u-turn, and I also think they did very similar.

 

The impression I got is that the SE5a in FC cannot be said to retain less energy than in ROF. If I were to give an opinion, I would say that the SE5a in FC has a slight advantage, especially in acceleration in the dives.

 

It was just initial tests, but if the SE5a in FC were noticeably worse, I think I would notice. The two tests (diving with a straight climb and diving with a left climb) do not represent all aspects of the vertical fight, but at least I could not see any degradation of the SE5a's performance in FC, on the contrary. I think she is slightly better, perhaps because of the new atmosphere that we have in FC, one of the positive things we felt when we got here.

 

Anyway, anyone who is curious can do these tests. The Mixture of the SE5a in FC was 86%. In ROF it has no value, so I had to adjust it visually, but it would also be around 85/87%.

 

Also take into account the placebo effect of the sound effects and graphics.

 

Also take into account the different angles that everyone will put on the planes, so the result is a comparison of you flying in ROF and FC, not against other players' tests. 

 

What RPM do you get at different speed increments (10mph) in RoF ?   Has the SE5a ever been correct, with regard to it’s RPM ?

[No.23_Triggers]

52 minutes ago, SeaW0lf said:

The impression I got is that the SE5a in FC cannot be said to retain less energy than in ROF. If I were to give an opinion, I would say that the SE5a in FC has a slight advantage, especially in acceleration in the dives.

Interesting. I find the retention to be the complete opposite. The dive speed feels okay - I've yet to test VS. RoF. As for the energy loss -  I think it'll become a lot more apparent if you get into some combats with her. My experience is that the first dive feels okay, but more than two and you're struggling to zoom back up. After a half-turn in the flat, the S.E. often won't even be able to bring its nose 90 degrees up in a stall-climb. Comparing with the SPAD in terms of energy retention is night and day - it's no contest. 

Edited May 4, 2020 by US93_Larner

[SeaW0lf]

28 minutes ago, US93_Larner said:

Interesting. I find the retention to be the complete opposite. The dive speed feels okay - I've yet to test VS. RoF. As for the energy loss -  I think it'll become a lot more apparent if you get into some combats with her. My experience is that the first dive feels okay, but more than two and you're struggling to zoom back up. After a half-turn in the flat, the S.E. often won't even be able to bring its nose 90 degrees up in a stall-climb. Comparing with the SPAD in terms of energy retention is night and day - it's no contest. 

 

I'll see if I can time the dives with a stopwatch, but aside the sound effects, they seemed to behave very similarly, with the FC SE5a being easier to break the 280km/h barrier and the 330m mark.

 

But you can't use your FC experience and compare with a game you don't play anymore (ROF). The best is to do these dive tests and compare the two. Ingame it is also dependant on the opponent. As I always mention, if we had a furball server with people flying every day, then you can rinse and repeat maneuvers four five times against a guy and have a better idea.

 

On the speeds, I recommend people to look for a speed chart made back in the days with Chill's TAS conversion table. The numbers are very similar to my tests, which can also be used. I did not test the FC planes at altitude, just sea level, but I imagine they will also have similar numbers if the sea level data is matching, and I think they all are with slight deviations.

 

31 minutes ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

What RPM do you get at different speed increments (10mph) in RoF ?   Has the SE5a ever been correct, with regard to it’s RPM ?

 

I'm not sure how the engine, prop is modeled, then I think those rpm theories might not apply as a solution. 

Edited May 4, 2020 by SeaW0lf

[No.23_Starling]

37 minutes ago, US93_Larner said:

Interesting. I find the retention to be the complete opposite. The dive speed feels okay - I've yet to test VS. RoF. As for the energy loss -  I think it'll become a lot more apparent if you get into some combats with her. My experience is that the first dive feels okay, but more than two and you're struggling to zoom back up. After a half-turn in the flat, the S.E. often won't even be able to bring its nose 90 degrees up in a stall-climb. Comparing with the SPAD in terms of energy retention is night and day - it's no contest. 

It’s the fall off after the first few boom and zooms. You’ll very quickly find yourself under the Dvs and Diiis or without safe vertical separation, even when they are pulling full elevator flat turns which should burn their energy (they can do this perpetually with stable RPM; try that in the SE and see what happens) and unable to get your nose up at them when they can with ease from out of a hard turn. 

 

The SE gets into a floppy fish state seemingly very quickly relative to its opponents and makes easy meat for the average Central player from this point without a ton of skill and luck; even diving away takes time to get up speed leaving you vulnerable. Climbing away isn’t much of an option either even when you still have some alt advantage with the Dv and Diii prop hang ability. We can’t really go to the devs with anecdotal evidence (even when it’s very compelling from both sides that the SE outperformed the Dv and diii, including from MvR himself) or complaints around balancing, however we can reasonably put forward engine data from a real surviving plane with the correct engine.

[No.23_Gaylion]

Honestly, I don't like comparing things to RoF. This is a different game, engine, flight model, etc. and I'd much prefer data be compared to real life sources when available. 

46 minutes ago, SeaW0lf said:

 As I always mention, if we had a furball server with people flying every day, then you can rinse and repeat maneuvers four five times against a guy and have a better idea.

 

 

 

This is what we do on our training server which is why we hold such strong opinions on things-not trying to be a smart-ass here (for once)

[SeaW0lf]

16 minutes ago, US213_Talbot said:

This is what we do on our training server which is why we hold such strong opinions on things-not trying to be a smart-ass here (for once)

 

That makes sense, but you guys could do tests on both games at the same time with some sort of methodology, because I felt they seem to be very alike and both reach a similar altitude after the bounces (a slight edge to FC). I'll check the time they take to reach the same altitude, but I assume it would be similar as well. At least on the dive, I felt the SE5a speeds faster than the one in ROF. Might be just an impression, but I had a harder time to go over 275km/h in ROF.

 

In general, I think that the initial impression that the planes were getting a boost in FC stands, even after the prop adjustment they did. I think FC has a better atmospheric model, and one of the reasons why speed varies depending on the season, while in ROF we have the same speed for winter and summer, for example.

 

EDIT: for example, now that I'm back to ROF, things that we took for granted seems to be almost alien now. Bullet dispersion is weird, I think we have some weird lag hits in ROF (perhaps network), and I'm flying the N17 a lot, and if you sneeze at it she'll fold her wings. It is basically a glass plane that cannot take one hit. Then impressions get skewed as time passes by, although I'm seeing Albies folding wings a lot as well.

Edited May 4, 2020 by SeaW0lf

[ST_Catchov]

8 hours ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

L/Shift + C

 

Thanks Hagar. It is now listed as "change firing position" in the weapons section. Not immediately obvious as a Lewis tilt command. 

 

8 hours ago, SeaW0lf said:

 

I can get to 220km/h at the autumn map (ISA standard), which is a bit better than the 218km/h indicated on the specs.

 

 

But the specs in FC are 223kph.

[Tycoon]

16 hours ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

 

 

 Maybe it’s just me, but I find that, the more you suck energy and slow down the poorer the roll becomes and because the SE5a sucks energy big time it’s roll rate diminishes accordingly ?  If you end up co-altitude and co-energy with anything then the prospects for an SE pilot become increasingly bleak.  If it’s roll rate, in the game, was so fabulous I can’t understand why everyone isn’t just expounding a flat scissors as the perfect defensive manoeuvre ?

at low energy the roll rate of the se5 beats the d7 easily and if I'm in that situation I use it. As people have pointed out a smart d7 will just stay in a turn. There were a lot of match ups in ROF that were like this come to think of it, n11 vs halb d2, n17 vs dr1, a dolphin with just the standard 2 guns could out turn a d7 slightly, but the d7 could scissor much better. 

10 hours ago, US213_Talbot said:

Honestly, I don't like comparing things to RoF. This is a different game, engine, flight model, etc. 

 

 

I think the similarities massively outweigh the differences.

[SeaW0lf]

5 hours ago, catchov said:

But the specs in FC are 223kph.

 

Perhaps it was the specs before the prop fix? And how about the others? Because you might get to 223km/h in a winter map.

[emely]

21 hours ago, Tycoon said:

 

I think the similarities massively outweigh the differences.

It’s really difficult to compare, because RoF is a great game, and the circus is an accidental by-product and an ugly duckling from birth.

P.S.

I want a triplane.  But even if it is made in a circus, it will surely be even more ugly than in a RoF.  On it, I made my last flight to RoF at the last FiF in RoF ...

 

[J5_Adam]

1 minute ago, emely said:

It’s really difficult to compare, because RoF is a great game, and the circus is an accidental by-product and an ugly duckling from birth.

P.S.

I want a triplane.  But even if it is made in a circus, it will surely be even more ugly than in a RoF.  On it, I made my last flight to RoF at the last FiF in RoF ...

 

 

Because the Camel and Triplane share the same engine, the 130HP, The Triplane's FM ended up sucking BIG time compared to what it was. It was, IMO, THE best FM... pre-nerf.

[emely]

In general, I did not understand your idea at all) But this is not important, since it is simply off top and nostalgia.  Triplane was badly damaged by the next patch, but left a couple of abilities interesting for me.  Few people flew on it, especially on Dogfight. However, when they gave it to us at FIF, everyone cried, and only I was happy ;-)))

[US103_Baer]

@SeaW0lf the in-game figures in the table are from FC post prop update, not RoF. They are IAS not TAS, as the idea was to compare specs in FC with in-game perf in FC, which are given in IAS. The RoF stats were provided as well, to indicate where the Devs had changed the spec and compare perf to those. Specs in RoF were based on given ref sources.

The changes are interesting and without explanation from devs, a bit confusing.

 

The SE5a had it's specs adjusted significantly, and are now closer to actual in-game in FC. 222kph is achievable using careful stab trim for max level speed, I have the screen cap.  The Spad is just wrong. The Dr1 we know about and the D7f specs change, higher at msl but now lower at  2k in FC, equivalent to a no alt throttle speed, though who would measure top speed at 2k without it? 

 

Hope this explains.

Edited May 6, 2020 by US103_Baer

[Tycoon]

9 hours ago, emely said:

It’s really difficult to compare, because RoF is a great game, and the circus is an accidental by-product and an ugly duckling from birth.

P.S.

I want a triplane.  But even if it is made in a circus, it will surely be even more ugly than in a RoF.  On it, I made my last flight to RoF at the last FiF in RoF ...

 

That's some good flying, the sopwith tri was one of the few planes in rof I wouldn't fly regularly, looks like it could scissor a bit, even with the dr1, didn't know that.

 

To me the sopwith triplane represents everything that was wrong with rof, The flight model was completely unlike anything from history but the devs would say like they would with every bad fm "well it has to be true because our game engine simulates perfect physics like real life and since every fm is made the same way every flight model in the game has the same accuracy", this case in particular with the relation between the camel and tripe. This attitude in relation to their game engine still hasn't changed, just read the update for the new dm and You'll see what I mean. 

Edited May 6, 2020 by Tycoon

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

1 hour ago, Tycoon said:

To me the sopwith triplane represents everything that was wrong with rof

Can you elaborate this please ?

[Tycoon]

11 hours ago, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

Can you elaborate this please ?

Simply put the fms in rof were wildy inconsistent, the sopwith tripe being the worst offender.

[ST_Catchov]

14 hours ago, Tycoon said:

 "well it has to be true because our game engine simulates perfect physics like real life and since every fm is made the same way every flight model in the game has the same accuracy" 

 

This is somewhat true and a source of great frustration for me back in the RoF days prompting me to end my association with it years ago. Oh if only we hadn't complained. The original FM's weren't too bad actually (imo). And then the FM's were "improved" with no going back and it just weirded me out of the game.

 

At least now we have FC where there are none of these issues.  I should have known better. But what is a WW1 tragic supposed to do? Join the WWII flyboys? Not gonna happen.

[SeaW0lf]

On 5/5/2020 at 10:03 PM, US103_Baer said:

@SeaW0lf the in-game figures in the table are from FC post prop update, not RoF. They are IAS not TAS, as the idea was to compare specs in FC with in-game perf in FC, which are given in IAS. The RoF stats were provided as well, to indicate where the Devs had changed the spec and compare perf to those. Specs in RoF were based on given ref sources.

The changes are interesting and without explanation from devs, a bit confusing.

 

The SE5a had it's specs adjusted significantly, and are now closer to actual in-game in FC. 222kph is achievable using careful stab trim for max level speed, I have the screen cap.  The Spad is just wrong. The Dr1 we know about and the D7f specs change, higher at msl but now lower at  2k in FC, equivalent to a no alt throttle speed, though who would measure top speed at 2k without it? 

 

Hope this explains.

 

But it matches the speed of the SE5a in ROF, which would be 119km/h on the HUD without the elevator trick if I'm not mistaken. I'm not sure where does come their numbers and they have been giving 'wrong' numbers for us since day one, numbers that we can't match in the actual engine. Their response is that they have a different medium to test and it is the real deal or something like it, but this is why I always think it is good to bring TAS numbers with ISA standard, so that this way we can compare them with clarity, because ROF is the only reference we got.

 

They just ported the flight models. They did not promise fixes or tweaks. This is why I always test the planes at the autumn map, which matches the atmosphere in all maps in ROF. So if the Spad was wrong in ROF, it would be wrong here as well. Just in the case of nerfings that we can complain, since they rolled back some planes and forgot about some others.

 

Taken in this context, the numbers are correct here after the prop fix as far as I remember, giving it a slight margin of error.

 

Then I think it is dangerous to bring off-numbers to these threads without context because we might have a bad surprise the next day and people get rowdy when talking about their rides or direct foes.
 

[SeaW0lf]

15 hours ago, Tycoon said:

Simply put the fms in rof were wildy inconsistent, the sopwith tripe being the worst offender.

 

Are you refering to the current Sopwith Triplane flight model?

[J5_Adam]

4 hours ago, SeaW0lf said:

 

Are you refering to the current Sopwith Triplane flight model?

He must be because when it first appeared in RoF it was really good and very much in line with what pilot reports said. 

[Tycoon]

9 hours ago, SeaW0lf said:

 

Are you refering to the current Sopwith Triplane flight model?

Yep. I never flew the original. 

Edited May 7, 2020 by Tycoon

[SeaW0lf]

34 minutes ago, Tycoon said:

Yep. I never flew the original. 

 

Ah, OK. The current Sopwith Triplane is just broken. She was apparently nerfed with the bunch of renegades because she shared the same engine code (Clerget 9B) of the Camel, so they had to throttle back both planes - which is weird the thought that one was supposed to stay the way it was.

 

Let's then hope for FC2 (with no shaking planes and folding wings) and that they will roll back the Tripehound, because as Adam mentioned, it was arguably the best flight model that we had in my opinion. She was a beauty. Hard to fly, with a nasty spin, but deadly in good hands against the mid-war planes if you disregard the single machinegun.

 

The irony of it all is that the DVa toppled the Tripehound during the war, but since they rolled back the DVa in FC, even if we get the original Tripehound here, it would be against a 170km/h DVa. We have a better DVa in ROF, but they nerfed the Tripehound... In other words, we'll never see the historic matchup. It will be always skewed, both here and in ROF.

 

Anyways... 

Edited May 7, 2020 by SeaW0lf

[J5_Adam]

27 minutes ago, SeaW0lf said:

The irony of it all is that the DVa toppled the Tripehound during the war, but since they rolled back the DVa in FC, even if we get the original Tripehound here, it would be against a 170km/h DVa. 

I doubt Neoqb or 777 understood about the engine variants and RATED HP for all of the Mercedes engines we have in game .  
 

BTW The DVa also used the DIIIaü

Edited May 8, 2020 by Adam

[SeaW0lf]

10 minutes ago, Adam said:

I don’t Neoqb or 777 understood about the engine variants and RATED HP for all of the Mercedes engines we have in game .  
 

BTW The DVa also used the DIIIaü

 

I need to change my signature to "engine variants please" ? followed by "no more shaking and folding planes either". 

[Cynic_Al]

On 5/8/2020 at 12:35 AM, SeaW0lf said:

She was apparently nerfed with the bunch of renegades because she shared the same engine code (Clerget 9B) of the Camel, so they had to throttle back both planes -

 

There's no reason they couldn't have cloned the engine code to give two versions, but they just didn't.

 

 

On 5/8/2020 at 12:35 AM, SeaW0lf said:

The irony of it all is that the DVa toppled the Tripehound during the war

 

Citation required.