4.006 DM Discussion

September 30, 2020

1 hour ago, Tycoon said:

Good point and something that isn't brought up much. The only reason I bought FC was for multiplayer, I just assumed the online numbers would be good because it was new, but even close to release like you said it was bad. I mean yeah certainly much better than what we have now ( which is basically non-existent ) but honestly even if we got back to release numbers I'm not sure that would be good enough for me. Never would have bought FC if I had known how doa it would be.

Yeah, it is a shame, many more players are needed.

September 30, 2020

1 hour ago, Tycoon said:

Good point and something that isn't brought up much. The only reason I bought FC was for multiplayer, I just assumed the online numbers would be good because it was new, but even close to release like you said it was bad. I mean yeah certainly much better than what we have now ( which is basically non-existent ) but honestly even if we got back to release numbers I'm not sure that would be good enough for me. Never would have bought FC if I had known how doa it would be.

Excuse please but FC was not DOA. It was a big leap forward. It came with 4k resolution, VR, High resolution map, a great FM/DM. It was very impressive .......... until they fixed it.

Hopefully it will be impressive again in the very near future.

September 30, 2020

I don't see how anyone would say FC was DOA, You have to remember we only have one module with 10 planes 1 small map with sinking ground that you can't place air fields any where you like, 1 season. no single player content. Yet on 2 days a week the server was packed, In il2 I only see 2 maybe 3 servers with a good crowd during peek times, And during Thursdays and Sundays I see as many in the FC server as there is in il2 before the DM change. Even now with this DM I see more in Flugpark on Thursday and Sunday than 90% of the servers. So if they gave it a chance you could see bigger crowds flying FC.

I don't see why they can't give us a separate main server and set the DM for FC back to what it was like before? At least try it and see if the sim will grow.

September 30, 2020

54 minutes ago, JG1_Butzzell said:

Excuse please but FC was not DOA. It was a big leap forward. It came with 4k resolution, VR, High resolution map, a great FM/DM. It was very impressive .......... until they fixed it.

Hopefully it will be impressive again in the very near future.

I was referring to online numbers, which has nothing to do with the stuff you mentioned. Doa might be an over statement, the point is it was still way lower than I expected. Maybe for some it's good enough, I was expecting more.

September 30, 2020

FC is 100% VR for me—it beats the WWII planes in every way except for 3D cockpit detail and it turns FC from a half-baked RoF remaster into a genuine timemachine to 1918. Sadly I can't stomach more than 30-40 minutes of VR before motion sickness kicks in, nor do I find it particularly conducive with regards to SA compared to TrackIR. This means that long multiplayer sessions are out. Even in single player what I enjoy most now is the occasional quick mission, not unlike a civilian flightsim with the odd dogfight thrown in between. At $80 with very little single player content and sporadic multiplayer activity, it's a hard sell to anyone but the hardcore nerds, no matter how great the VR experience.

Still, I can't wait to see what it will look like on an HP Reverb G2 with an RTX 3080 to power it. When you start to consider hardware that expensive, the price of admission becomes irrelevant, and it pushes the sim into the nichiest of niches. What would be best if we do eventually see FC2, is not to release any more full volumes but sell planes individually from then on. In other words: make the game even more expensive to keep development viable. Clearly all attempts at making it more accessible to a wider audience have failed.

As for multiplayer fun and reliving the "Good Old Days" of RoF, it's time that the devs revisit that game and fix it up for posterity—or at least give access to the people who'd be willing to do it for them for free. Since there is no competition on the market but FC itself, I don't see that happening anytime soon.

September 30, 2020

10 hours ago, J99_Sizzlorr said:

You can try this but to me it seems the devs don't want to discuss the DM.

What I tried so far with no results:

1. Wrote a P.M. to Jason a month ago. It says that he hasn't read it yet. No response.

2. Wrote a P.M. to Han a month ago. It says he hasn't read it yet. No response.

3. Made a post in the bugs and technical support forum. Got ignorged.

4. After a ww2 bloke asked a ww2 damage model question and got an answer, I rephrased his exact same wording only about ww1 DM. My post got deleted.

5. Thanked them for the spledid conversation and their time. Post got deleted.

Well no answer is still an answer. And deleting posts is also an answer. I don't bother anymore and I sure as heck don't buy any AA trucks. I feel treated like a step child. They don't converse with us until we get scandalous! @Jason_Williams please fix this.

I'm with you Sizzy. It's pathetic.

As for getting ignorged. Now that is a step up. The ultimate passive aggressive insult. I thought the moderators had banned its use?

September 30, 2020

15 minutes ago, Tycoon said:

I was referring to online numbers, which has nothing to do with the stuff you mentioned. Doa might be an over statement, the point is it was still way lower than I expected. Maybe for some it's good enough, I was expecting more.

It was never given a real chance, You or anyone don't know where it would have gone if it was kept the way it was from the beginning. I just can't see what your talking about, It was growing in player base. With VR I think it would have smoked il2, And I'm getting this from VR users. I seen people come in say how much better VR is in FC than il2, Best game out there for VR users, Though I don't have it I can only imagine it's awesome from the guys I fly with that do have VR. Is that not a huge plus for a sim? I'm sure starwars squadron may be up there for VR users but from what I hear it doesn't support head tracking so that will be a bust for me.

October 1, 2020

49 minutes ago, ST_Catchov said:

......The ultimate passive aggressive insult. I thought the moderators had banned its use?

You're still here, aren't you?

41 minutes ago, NO.20_W_M_Thomson said:

It was never given a real chance, You or anyone don't know where it would have gone if it was kept the way it was from the beginning. I just can't see what your talking about, It was growing in player base. With VR I think it would have smoked il2, And I'm getting this from VR users. I seen people come in say how much better VR is in FC than il2, Best game out there for VR users, Though I don't have it I can only imagine it's awesome from the guys I fly with that do have VR. Is that not a huge plus for a sim? I'm sure starwars squadron may be up there for VR users but from what I hear it doesn't support head tracking so that will be a bust for me.

Since IL-2 BoX and Flying Circus all exist within the same game engine, I don't know why VR while using one would "smoke" the other. It all comes down to what plane you want to be flying and what cockpit you want to sit in. Clearly, more people prefer to be in the pit of high performance World War 2 plane than they do in a stringbag World War I plane. Nobody's fault, it's just the way it is.

Edited October 1, 2020 by SeaSerpent

October 1, 2020

3 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

Clearly, more people prefer to be in the pit of high performance World War 2 plane than they do in a stringbag World War I plane. Nobody's fault, it's just the way it is.

I don't agree with this, you're forgetting that what we have as FC is basically RoF with vr added, a game back from 2009. Plenty of people played RoF at release like people play GB now.

Apparently People aren't as stupid as some here would hope, anyone that played RoF somewhat seriously and saw FC would have seen what it was, an expensive port with less content( yes hellbender I already mentioned vr). For most of us hardcore ww1 players we still went with it cause there is nothing else, but I have the feeling a lot of ex RoFers went with the newer options because, well they don't want to spend for the same old game, and you can't blame them, everyone wants to play the new stuff. If microsoft made a ww1 sim it would curb stomp GB player numbers.

Edit; I of course agree ww2 is more popular everyone knows that, but that is not the reason for the difference in players between GB and FC.

Edited October 1, 2020 by Tycoon

October 1, 2020

10 minutes ago, Tycoon said:

Edit; I of course agree ww2 is more popular everyone knows that, but that is not the reason for the difference in players between GB and FC.

Counterpoint: Yes it is. Because that is pretty much what "more popular" means.

October 1, 2020

40 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

Counterpoint: Yes it is. Because that is pretty much what "more popular" means.

Ok sure it's part of the reason but not the whole reason, not even the main reason.

Edited October 1, 2020 by Tycoon

October 1, 2020

1 hour ago, Tycoon said:

Ok sure it's part of the reason but not the whole reason, not even the main reason.

The word you're looking for is underrated.

It's a catch-22, however. WWI planes need to be popular and make money in order to develop the tech needed to correctly represent them in terms of FM/DM (soft-body physics etc.), and they won't become more popular until they are correctly represented. Back in 2009, the RoF engine developed by Neoqb was revolutionary compared to IL-2 1946 and it drew in a lot of people in spite of being WWI-only. Nowadays we clearly see its shortcomings, especially because of how much better the updated engine works for rigid body WWII planes.

October 1, 2020

8 hours ago, NO.20_W_M_Thomson said:

It was never given a real chance, You or anyone don't know where it would have gone if it was kept the way it was from the beginning. I just can't see what your talking about, It was growing in player base. With VR I think it would have smoked il2, And I'm getting this from VR users. I seen people come in say how much better VR is in FC than il2, Best game out there for VR users, Though I don't have it I can only imagine it's awesome from the guys I fly with that do have VR. Is that not a huge plus for a sim? I'm sure starwars squadron may be up there for VR users but from what I hear it doesn't support head tracking so that will be a bust for me.

How it is so much better in VR than IL-2? I don't get that at all, please explain. Are you talking about your subjective experience or is there something objectively concrete?

October 1, 2020

Thomsom said he didn't have VR, so won't likely be able to answer that specifically.

I don't have VR either, but he's quoting comments I've seen on the forum.

I think people are referring to the intensity, and close combat nature of ww1 as being particularly sexy in VR.

I can understand that.

S!

October 1, 2020

16 minutes ago, Zooropa_Fly said:

Thomsom said he didn't have VR, so won't likely be able to answer that specifically.

I don't have VR either, but he's quoting comments I've seen on the forum.

I think people are referring to the intensity, and close combat nature of ww1 as being particularly sexy in VR.

I can understand that.

S!

Ok, that could make sense.

October 1, 2020

8 hours ago, messsucher said:

How it is so much better in VR than IL-2? I don't get that at all, please explain. Are you talking about your subjective experience or is there something objectively concrete?

Just what I hear from many, you'd have to ask the VR people that includes 2 squad mates.

10 hours ago, J5_Hellbender said:

Nowadays we clearly see its shortcomings, especially because of how much better the updated engine works for rigid body WWII planes.

I didn't see too many complaints when FC1 was completed.

October 1, 2020

It was also released two planes at a time over months with the map showing up at the end. So it wasn't like it was completely released 100% on a certain day like most other games.

So to say it was DOA depends on the day you look at it as "arriving". I know for me I "owned" it a very long time before actually playing it for more than 3 minutes.

What CANNOT be argued is that the overwhelming majority of people have left the game due to the dislike of the current DM. It's completely undebatable.

You can theorize this, that, and the other are the reasons why it's not popular, that's great. But you have a glaring reason slapping you in the face that is obvious to anyone looking at the whole picture objectively.

This DM does not work.

October 1, 2020

11 hours ago, messsucher said:

How it is so much better in VR than IL-2? I don't get that at all, please explain. Are you talking about your subjective experience or is there something objectively concrete?

FC and it's slower pace and tighter combat suited the low resolution that most VR headsets used. Newer headsets, such as the Reverb G2, will hopefully make, faster paced, WW II (online) combat more competitive for VR players.

October 1, 2020

Talbot, I agree 100% with you. The DM is broken, and is the biggest factor behind declining numbers. I'm not sure which is worse, wings popping off with no warning, or loss of control surfaces more frequently that should be occurring. I don't have the sources and documentation to argue about historical accuracy of either of those, but I can tell you beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is very discouraging as a player. Even without technical references, it seems reasonable that severing one cable on a rudder that has a cable on both sides shouldn't completely disable the rudder, though, nor should having redundant control cables make the plane more vulnerable to control loss.

I can speak to the VR aspect. My brother Kotori and I played ROF extensively, participating in several Bloody April events and regular Fly Ins on the New Wings Wargrounds and Basic Training servers. Unfortunately, I can't take any peripherals underway on a submarine with me, so I gradually faded out of the active scene. I jumped on the VR bandwagon fairly early, picking up an Oculus Dev Kit 2 to start playing VR games, then later a Rift CV1, Vive, Quest, and now a pair of Indexes (my current headset). Despite the number of VR games I played, I stayed away from flight sims, because I didn't want to tarnish the great memories of flying ROF with a crappy, cobbled together, incomplete VR solution. I enjoyed drifting through space in Lone Echo, petting the mouse in Moss, swinging like spiderman in Windlands and Windlands 2, and piloting giant robots in Vox Machinae. My mind was blown with the physics interactions of Boneworks (melee combat, guns, and physics puzzles), then blown again with HL: Alyx (I don't know where to begin on this one). I've watched VR grow up.

I'm glad I took the time, because when I came back to flight simming, almost everything was in place for me to have a solid first experience. I get seasick (imagine that from a navy man), so playing other games helped me build my VR legs. Although I started with 15-30 minute sessions, I was easily able to sit through the full 4 hours of Black September without batting an eye.

Sitting in the cockpit. There was a whole section of the forum filled with tips and recommended settings to maximize my FPS, reduce motion sickness, improve spotting, etc. Within a couple weeks of starting, the VR zoom received a major overhaul, making it possible for me to compete online.

The improvement from ROF to FC in VR is difficult to understate. It's bigger than the jump from mouse-look to Track-IR that I did back when I first started flying. It's bigger than a force feedback joystick. It's bigger than when I got a triple monitor setup, or when I swapped that out for a 40" 4k monitor at 60hz. I'm there. I'm sitting in a cockpit with the wind rushing by my head. I have to crane my neck as I look around (and yes, I was sore after the first two weeks of BS until my neck got used to the longer flights), and it's hard to hold the stick straight when checking six. I can lean over the side to spot villages and roads below to navigate without rolling the plane on its side. Like with Track IR, I can move my head up or down, right or left to see gages better or to see around a strut, but in VR it's so natural I don't even think about it. Flying low, I know how high I am. Dipping under a bridge in VR is incomparable to a flat screen, and zipping among the trees or along the streets of the cities is a real white-knuckle experience.

Flying up close with another machine is a totally different experience. Like with flying low to the ground, close formation with another plane is made vastly simpler because I can see how far I am, whether I am closing or opening range. The auditory improvements are also significant. I always struggled holding formation if a friendly was obscured by my own plane: I could hear them but couldn't maintain a sense of where they were because Track IR isn't a 1-to-1 match to my head movement. I can't count the times I've avoided a collision in VR because I could hear in 3d space where a plane was that I couldn't see. The opening strike in Sector A of BS, with the roaring engines of three wings of 6 planes each all flying to the same target was a sublime experience. I can see where my bullets are hitting and walk them in much more easily than I ever could in RoF. There are some planes like the Bristol in which I eschew addon gun sights because they get in the way, and I can aim perfectly fine without it. The low altitude fight against Konnecke near the Sector A Observation post, where he was dodging among the trees and along the canal was simply incredible. No combat I ever had on a flat screen ever moved me as much as that single fight. Salute!

Everything I have said applies to both FC and the rest of BoX. I have tried the WW2 planes, and could still hold formation easily, or tell how long until touchdown while landing. The difference is in the size and speed of the planes, and therefore the ranges at which combat takes place. In WW2, I had to maneuver against a dot that I could barely see, straining to tell the difference between friendly and enemy planes. In FC, I know that the fight won't begin until I'm close enough to easily tell the difference. I can see the green tail, or red nose, or personal emblem so I know who I'm fighting, where as in WW2 I know what plane I'm fighting. As HagarTheHorrible said, FC works better in VR because the range and speed is much less than WW2. The simpler planes of FC are also easier to handle in VR. This is because it is very difficult to use a keyboard when you can't see it, so most controls must be assigned to buttons on a joystick or throttle. I got a Virpil throttle recently, so I have enough knobs, dials, buttons, and switches to easily handle the WW2 controls now, I just haven't had time to assign them yet.

There are, of course, some challenges associated with VR, not just for FC. Motion sickness can be an issue for some people, although it is possible to build tolerance much like a sailor can get his "sea legs." VR tends to require very high end hardware to run, and even then, the settings usually have to be turned down. I run a 1080ti and recently upgraded to a i7-9700k overclocked to 4.8Ghz, and can barely maintain 80hz on my Index with most settings on medium or low. I'm planning some upgrades over the next year, which should help. Newer headsets have higher resolution screens and better lenses, so perhaps my comment about "fighting a dot" may soon be inaccurate. Some people also find it too immersive because it shuts out most of the real world. There was a thread in the VR section of the forum about someone who swapped back to flat screen because he couldn't respond to his wife and kids while flying in VR.

I am a bit of a VR enthusiast, so I tend to paint a glowing picture, but in this case I think it truly is a whole different experience. I simply cannot go back to flat screen flying. You could give me a flat screen with all the reflections and ultra shadows and clouds and waving grass and 8x antialiasing, and it would only be a window into the world that I could never truly be in. I would rather have the low to medium settings to fly in VR, because then I truly am part of that world (cue Ariel the mermaid singing). It just so happens to be that FC is easier to fly VR in that the WW2 modules of BoX, which is why I am so sad to see the sorry state of the DM and the effect it's having on the community.

October 1, 2020

31 minutes ago, gascan said:

Talbot, I agree 100% with you. The DM is broken, and is the biggest factor behind declining numbers. I'm not sure which is worse, wings popping off with no warning, or loss of control surfaces more frequently that should be occurring. I don't have the sources and documentation to argue about historical accuracy of either of those, but I can tell you beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is very discouraging as a player. Even without technical references, it seems reasonable that severing one cable on a rudder that has a cable on both sides shouldn't completely disable the rudder, though, nor should having redundant control cables make the plane more vulnerable to control loss.

I can speak to the VR aspect. My brother Kotori and I played ROF extensively, participating in several Bloody April events and regular Fly Ins on the New Wings Wargrounds and Basic Training servers. Unfortunately, I can't take any peripherals underway on a submarine with me, so I gradually faded out of the active scene. I jumped on the VR bandwagon fairly early, picking up an Oculus Dev Kit 2 to start playing VR games, then later a Rift CV1, Vive, Quest, and now a pair of Indexes (my current headset). Despite the number of VR games I played, I stayed away from flight sims, because I didn't want to tarnish the great memories of flying ROF with a crappy, cobbled together, incomplete VR solution. I enjoyed drifting through space in Lone Echo, petting the mouse in Moss, swinging like spiderman in Windlands and Windlands 2, and piloting giant robots in Vox Machinae. My mind was blown with the physics interactions of Boneworks (melee combat, guns, and physics puzzles), then blown again with HL: Alyx (I don't know where to begin on this one). I've watched VR grow up.

I'm glad I took the time, because when I came back to flight simming, almost everything was in place for me to have a solid first experience. I get seasick (imagine that from a navy man), so playing other games helped me build my VR legs. Although I started with 15-30 minute sessions, I was easily able to sit through the full 4 hours of Black September without batting an eye.

Sitting in the cockpit. There was a whole section of the forum filled with tips and recommended settings to maximize my FPS, reduce motion sickness, improve spotting, etc. Within a couple weeks of starting, the VR zoom received a major overhaul, making it possible for me to compete online.

The improvement from ROF to FC in VR is difficult to understate. It's bigger than the jump from mouse-look to Track-IR that I did back when I first started flying. It's bigger than a force feedback joystick. It's bigger than when I got a triple monitor setup, or when I swapped that out for a 40" 4k monitor at 60hz. I'm there. I'm sitting in a cockpit with the wind rushing by my head. I have to crane my neck as I look around (and yes, I was sore after the first two weeks of BS until my neck got used to the longer flights), and it's hard to hold the stick straight when checking six. I can lean over the side to spot villages and roads below to navigate without rolling the plane on its side. Like with Track IR, I can move my head up or down, right or left to see gages better or to see around a strut, but in VR it's so natural I don't even think about it. Flying low, I know how high I am. Dipping under a bridge in VR is incomparable to a flat screen, and zipping among the trees or along the streets of the cities is a real white-knuckle experience.

Flying up close with another machine is a totally different experience. Like with flying low to the ground, close formation with another plane is made vastly simpler because I can see how far I am, whether I am closing or opening range. The auditory improvements are also significant. I always struggled holding formation if a friendly was obscured by my own plane: I could hear them but couldn't maintain a sense of where they were because Track IR isn't a 1-to-1 match to my head movement. I can't count the times I've avoided a collision in VR because I could hear in 3d space where a plane was that I couldn't see. The opening strike in Sector A of BS, with the roaring engines of three wings of 6 planes each all flying to the same target was a sublime experience. I can see where my bullets are hitting and walk them in much more easily than I ever could in RoF. There are some planes like the Bristol in which I eschew addon gun sights because they get in the way, and I can aim perfectly fine without it. The low altitude fight against Konnecke near the Sector A Observation post, where he was dodging among the trees and along the canal was simply incredible. No combat I ever had on a flat screen ever moved me as much as that single fight. Salute!

Everything I have said applies to both FC and the rest of BoX. I have tried the WW2 planes, and could still hold formation easily, or tell how long until touchdown while landing. The difference is in the size and speed of the planes, and therefore the ranges at which combat takes place. In WW2, I had to maneuver against a dot that I could barely see, straining to tell the difference between friendly and enemy planes. In FC, I know that the fight won't begin until I'm close enough to easily tell the difference. I can see the green tail, or red nose, or personal emblem so I know who I'm fighting, where as in WW2 I know what plane I'm fighting. As HagarTheHorrible said, FC works better in VR because the range and speed is much less than WW2. The simpler planes of FC are also easier to handle in VR. This is because it is very difficult to use a keyboard when you can't see it, so most controls must be assigned to buttons on a joystick or throttle. I got a Virpil throttle recently, so I have enough knobs, dials, buttons, and switches to easily handle the WW2 controls now, I just haven't had time to assign them yet.

There are, of course, some challenges associated with VR, not just for FC. Motion sickness can be an issue for some people, although it is possible to build tolerance much like a sailor can get his "sea legs." VR tends to require very high end hardware to run, and even then, the settings usually have to be turned down. I run a 1080ti and recently upgraded to a i7-9700k overclocked to 4.8Ghz, and can barely maintain 80hz on my Index with most settings on medium or low. I'm planning some upgrades over the next year, which should help. Newer headsets have higher resolution screens and better lenses, so perhaps my comment about "fighting a dot" may soon be inaccurate. Some people also find it too immersive because it shuts out most of the real world. There was a thread in the VR section of the forum about someone who swapped back to flat screen because he couldn't respond to his wife and kids while flying in VR.

I am a bit of a VR enthusiast, so I tend to paint a glowing picture, but in this case I think it truly is a whole different experience. I simply cannot go back to flat screen flying. You could give me a flat screen with all the reflections and ultra shadows and clouds and waving grass and 8x antialiasing, and it would only be a window into the world that I could never truly be in. I would rather have the low to medium settings to fly in VR, because then I truly am part of that world (cue Ariel the mermaid singing). It just so happens to be that FC is easier to fly VR in that the WW2 modules of BoX, which is why I am so sad to see the sorry state of the DM and the effect it's having on the community.

You got me convinced. Never been a graphics whore and like immersion, so I think VR is my cake. Will get one, enough waiting already, from now on will enjoy the ride while waiting for more.

Been thinking that WW1 vs WW2 too, and have to try WW1 setting, been thinking for a long that too much complexity in the form of managing tons of buttons with bad usability blindfolded is not the right way, hence thinking is the space fantasy the right away, but since I like realism space flight is a bit wrong way. WW1 might be the right way, and interesting and fun way too because more close range.

Edited October 1, 2020 by messsucher

October 1, 2020

With respect gascan, is there an abridged version?

October 1, 2020

I'm wondering if clickable controls would be better for il2, I think DCS has that, using the mouse or controller that comes with VR for the controls.

October 1, 2020

Just now, NO.20_W_M_Thomson said:

I'm wondering if clickable controls would be better for il2, I think DCS has that, using the mouse or controller that comes with VR for the controls.

Jason has made it quite clear that this isn’t happening. Click-pits would be a massive project that really isn’t needed for WW2 aircraft.

October 2, 2020

1 hour ago, ST_Catchov said:

With respect gascan, is there an abridged version?

Ahh right, my apologies.

VR really is that good. Allow me to write a wall of text expressing my feelings in as many words as I possibly can ?

23 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

Jason has made it quite clear that this isn’t happening. Click-pits would be a massive project that really isn’t needed for WW2 aircraft.

I agree. Clickable cockpits would be far more effort than it would likely be worth at this point. Also, swapping between stick and throttle to a VR motion controller would be a bit awkward. It looks like hand tracking is coming along for Oculus (sorry, Facebook) so that could be a viable alternative in the future. It would probably make sense to start from scratch, though. For an example of a vr cockpit, check out VTOL VR.

October 2, 2020

7 hours ago, gascan said:

Ahh right, my apologies.

VR really is that good. Allow me to write a wall of text expressing my feelings in as many words as I possibly can ?

Lol no worries man. I was just foolin'. I do like your enthusiasm.

October 3, 2020

VR enthusiasm is extremely annoying to people who haven’t got VR. It’s bad enough on a forum, on voice comms you positively want to strangle whoever is oooh’ing and aaah’ing about a cockpit gauge, a fluffy cloud or a blade of grass. I remember being brought to tears by flying through the ambient explosions in no man’s land. The only cure, I’m afraid, is to get VR yourself. HP Reverb G2 next month!

You do get used to it, though in my case I’ve found that flightsims give me motion sickness while space sims do not. Last night I felt like I was really flying inside a Rebel A-Wing starfighter, a childhood fantasy that predates my love for airplanes. 2020 may suck in any number of ways, but VR is a dream come true.

October 3, 2020

1 hour ago, J5_Hellbender said:

VR enthusiasm is extremely annoying to people who haven’t got VR. It’s bad enough on a forum, on voice comms you positively want to strangle whoever is oooh’ing and aaah’ing about a cockpit gauge, a fluffy cloud or a blade of grass. I remember being brought to tears by flying through the ambient explosions in no man’s land. The only cure, I’m afraid, is to get VR yourself. HP Reverb G2 next month!

You do get used to it, though in my case I’ve found that flightsims give me motion sickness while space sims do not. Last night I felt like I was really flying inside a Rebel A-Wing starfighter, a childhood fantasy that predates my love for airplanes. 2020 may suck in any number of ways, but VR is a dream come true.

Haha, well. It is hard to say. But basically VR simming is like in that video below, if we imagine that the persons laughing heard someone saying pancaking is simmin.

It is not totally groundbreaking as for now, but it is still groundbreaking enough. In pancaking you are out of the game, but in VR you are inside the game. It really makes a huge difference.

October 13, 2020

Guys I need help, which planes represented in FC had control rods and which only control cables?

For example, Camel had 4 separate ailerons and control cables, but what I experienced about how DM is modeled, when I see message that my left aileron is damaged, right aileron always follows as would Camel had interlinked control rods. Moreover if one control cables would be damaged (cut) they should not render rest broken at once neither all should stay in one position but flutter in the air. Similar with the Camel elevator which consists of two separate surfaces and was controled by cables not rods which can be jammed.

I'm on something or i'm wrong ?

October 13, 2020

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

Guys I need help, which planes represented in FC had control rods and which only control cables?

For example, Camel had 4 separate ailerons and control cables, but what I experienced about how DM is modeled, when I see message that my left aileron is damaged, right aileron always follows as would Camel had interlinked control rods. Moreover if one control cables would be damaged (cut) they should not render rest broken at once neither all should stay in one position but flutter in the air. Similar with the Camel elevator which consists of two separate surfaces and was controled by cables not rods which can be jammed.

I'm on something or i'm wrong ?

You are spot on. From what I gathered control surfaces could get stuck in one position. But when the control wires are shut up they will be more likely unresponsive and flutter in the wind on the ww1 planes.

Also the Fokker D.VII had two seperate elevator controls one for the left side and one for the right side, like the S.E.5a. When the Fokker D.VII takes damage in that area, both control wires will fail synchronically. But when you let you Fokker D.VII repair you can see that both elevator controls get repaired seperatly. There seems to be something wrong with the elevator damage on the Fokker D.VII or I am just very unlucky.

Sign In

4.006 DM Discussion

Recommended Posts

messsucher

JG1_Butzzell

NO.20_W_M_Thomson

Tycoon

BMA_Hellbender

ST_Catchov

NO.20_W_M_Thomson

Guest deleted@83466

Tycoon

BraveSirRobin

Tycoon

BMA_Hellbender

messsucher

Zooropa_Fly

messsucher

NO.20_W_M_Thomson

No.23_Gaylion

HagarTheHorrible

=IRFC=Gascan

messsucher

ST_Catchov

NO.20_W_M_Thomson

BraveSirRobin

=IRFC=Gascan

ST_Catchov

BMA_Hellbender

messsucher

1PL-Husar-1Esk

J99_Sizzlorr

=IRFC=Gascan

SCG_Wulfe

NO.20_W_M_Thomson

Guest deleted@83466

NO.20_W_M_Thomson

Browse All

Activity