Jump to content

4.006 DM (wingshedding and shaking) in Multiplayer Discussion


Recommended Posts

Since the other thread is beginning to derail and I fear the devs might simply close the topic for good, let's start a parallel discussion about balancing multiplayer around the new 4.006 DM. This involves wingshedding and shaking after taking very little damage, particularly on some machines (Sopwith Dolphin, Sopwith Camel, SPAD XIII and Albatros D.Va), while others are unaffected or have gotten stronger (Fokker D.VIIF, Fokker Dr.I, Pfalz D.IIIa and Bristol Fighter).

 

 

I think a few things are clear so far:

 

  • Many people feel that FC MP works better with "strong wings" DM (could we return to pre-4.005/6 DM for MP as a server/realism setting?)
     
  • MP numbers are (possibly?) down since the new DM was released (assuming it's not Corona killing our older players...)
     
  • Some things are deemed unacceptable, such as removing planes or locking fuel to achieve balance

 

 

What are your thoughts and suggestions?

 

 

perfectly-balanced-as-all-things-should-

Edited by J5_Hellbender
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Flugpark server had 50 players yesterday evening (central european time). 
I was alone in a fight against 2 x Albatros and 2 x Halberstadt. I flew the Camel and I beat all four singlehandedly = Wings fell off right away on both Albatros after some solid burst at their body and wings. Same happened with the Halberstadts. I was like "okkaayy...?". It felt too easy. 

Then I was in a fight against some D7's = one of them managed to get a few hits on my wing. I managed to get a lot more hits into them. The one D7 I hit dived and escaped to the east.
The other one decided to continue dogfighting with me. As we were turning suddenly my wing broke. I didn't even pull hard G's. And my plane looked fine before it. No visual damage and my plane didn't even shake from damage. 

Your wings shouldn't fall off just because some bullets hit them. It's not like we are shooting high explosive big shells of rounds.

Edited by 127Tom
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd suggest another thread on the DM is pointless with the same old arguments recycled. But in for a penny ….

 

My thoughts are ….

 

DM won't be rolled back. And to have two DM's, (as someone suggested) one for SP and one for MP is ridiculous. Andrey would be choking on his Wheaties with that idea. The best we can hope for is some tweaks. And this is what I understood Larner, Unreasonable, Chilli and others were working on by compiling compelling data to present to Andrey. Do we really need more hand-wringing on this subject in another thread? 

 

I don't know if MP numbers are down but I'm sure you relied on stats of some kind? Note that 127Tom did say there were 50 players on Flug yesterday evening which ain't bad in my book. 

 

I do agree that removing planes or locking fuel is not the answer to balance.

 

Lastly, I've said before that the new DM is heading in the right direction (or words to that effect) and I just said it again. Just needs some fine tuning not a drastic overhaul. People will disagree of course and I'll probably get lots of "confused" faces or comments. But that's why I love it here. :biggrin:

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, J2_Bidu said:

I shot down a Camel in my Halberstadt. Putting aside the fun I had doing it (surprise more than antything), it did feel a bit wrong. I was not at all convinced it was a faIr kill.

 

Of course it's a fair kill! Well, unless you were using twin Spandaus and/or twin Parabellums. Or not flying in a straight line. Or not pulling 5g after taking damage yourself.

 

For the record: was it the wings?

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, catchov said:

I don't know if MP numbers are down but I'm sure you relied on stats of some kind? Note that 127Tom did say there were 50 players on Flug yesterday evening which ain't bad in my book. 

 

I have no idea, I was just repeating some of the arguments from the other thread, I don't have any statistics to that effect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I don't have broken spars / torn fabric or missing wires on  my Camel, my  wings shouldn't break so easily under moderate G load , but how I can know if my next manuver will be fatal if what  I see is just few black dots on the wings and how those little things can shake my plane so much... 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

If I don't have broken spars / torn fabric or missing wires on  my Camel, my  wings shouldn't break so easily under moderate G load , but how I can know if my next manuver will be fatal if what  I see is just few black dots on the wings and how those little things can shake my plane so much... 


I'm almost certain that any damage to the tailplane causes the shaking. Not sure that's how it should be, but that's what I've noticed. I don't think I've seen any shaking from wing damage, unless it's bad wing damage. 

Got a bunch of tracks from the ST server of SPAD wings being damaged and the results - planning on putting them in a video to properly analyse...

Edited by US93_Larner
Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys ought to sit your juicy butts down on an airfield somewhere, put one of you into the back seat of a two-seater, and carefully, from close range, place different numbers of bullets into one wing of a SPAD before it takes off.  Then take that SPAD through some progressively tighter maneuvers, and see what damage leads to what breaking points.

Edited by J28w-Broccoli
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats a waste of time.. We can do that just fine in the air vs. eachother. Plus its more of a realistic example of what one encounters on a multiplayer server...

 

You know, that thing that you don't ever play on but you come around these threads pretending you do and somehow consider yourself an expert in.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, J28w-Broccoli said:

You guys ought to sit your juicy butts down on an airfield somewhere, put one of you into the back seat of a two-seater, and carefully, from close range, place different numbers of bullets into one wing of a SPAD before it takes off.  Then take that SPAD through some progressively tighter maneuvers, and see what damage leads to what breaking points.

 

1 minute ago, US93_Talbot said:

Thats a waste of time.. We can do that just fine in the air vs. eachother. Plus its more of a realistic example of what one encounters on a multiplayer server...

 

Er....that seems like a very good idea to me.  You would have the ability to do controlled damage to a specific hit box no?:scratch_one-s_head:

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

How? The bullets travel through. They are going to hit multiple boxes. 

 

Just have your friend jump in a german plane and shoot very controlled bursts at you. He counts his rounds fired, you tell him how many hits you heard. Then go turn hard.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fine.  Just keep bitching about it on the forums then.  I can understand why you might not want to use a controlled method to analyse the current DM on your aircraft.  Figuring out how to isolate a hitbox isn't an insurmountable problem unless you want it to be.

 

By the way, I play plenty to test out the DM.  Flugpark isn't the only place to fly.

Edited by J28w-Broccoli
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, US93_Talbot said:

 He counts his rounds fired, you tell him how many hits you heard. 

 

:(

 

2 minutes ago, J5_Hellbender said:

You could use pistols, but I don’t think they’re high caliber enough to cause damage.

 

Caliber is not as much a problem as muzzle velocity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, J28w-Broccoli said:

You guys ought to sit your juicy butts down on an airfield somewhere, put one of you into the back seat of a two-seater, and carefully, from close range, place different numbers of bullets into one wing of a SPAD before it takes off.  Then take that SPAD through some progressively tighter maneuvers, and see what damage leads to what breaking points.


That will never happen. So why even talk this nonsense? 
As of now the the damage model is worse than in Rise of Flight. That's the only thing I never liked about Rise of Flight: The easy breakage of wings. Reason why I use the damage mod in singleplayer. 
Now in FC you just have to shoot at a guy's wings in a dogfight and wait for them to break as he tries to out turn you. 
In WW1 they aimed for the pilot and engine. Like it should be in in FC / RoF. They aim for realism. Why not aim for realistic damage?
The damage model was nearly perfect two months ago (with the exception of that annoying black screen for 20 seconds when you got wounded). 

Edited by 127Tom
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, 127Tom said:

Now in FC you just have to shoot at a guy's wings in a dogfight and wait for them to break as he tries to out turn you. 
In WW1 they aimed for the pilot and engine. Like it should be in in FC / RoF. They aim for realism. Why not aim for realistic damage?
The damage model was nearly perfect two months ago (with the exception of that annoying black screen for 20 seconds when you got wounded). 

 

For the purpose of this thread (and not having a repeat of the other thread), we assume that the new DM is realistic, that the calculations the devs have done are correct and that the problem with wingshedding and shaking is specific to multiplayer.

 

The case in point is: in single player the AI immediately adjusts its flying when it takes damage in order to avoid wingshedding. This is typically much harder to do in multiplayer.

 

Do you think there's a possibility that multiplayer gives an unrealistic advantage to turning and long range snapshooting and disadvantage to climbing/diving and short range accuracy?

Edited by J5_Hellbender
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, J5_Hellbender said:

 

For the purpose of this thread (and not having a repeat of the other thread), we assume that the new DM is realistic, that the calculations the devs have done are correct and that the problem with wingshedding and shaking is specific to multiplayer.

 

The case in point is: in single player the AI immediately adjusts its flying when it takes damage in order to avoid wingshedding. This is typically much harder to do in multiplayer.

 

Do you think there's a possibility that multiplayer gives an unrealistic advantage to turning and long range snapshooting and disadvantage to climbing/diving and short range accuracy?

AI damaged or not always is flying unloaded turn which human woud never do -  Ace or rookie. Who in the world would want to stay on enemy gun lead without trying to use max G avalible to spoil enemy shooting solution? Rookie would spin (exluding Alb;-) ) and ace woud ride on the edge. 
Somtimes you can shoot dozens of rounds when enemy is doing slow unlaoded trun without imediate result and this also feels unrealistic. More hit boxes and visual representaton, less under the hood propablistic theory please, spars can be broken not only becouse of G. AI defensive circle turn is crap and leads only to one end results. 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

AI damaged or not always is flying unloaded turn which human woud never do -  Ace or rookie. Who in the world would want to stay on enemy gun lead without trying to use max G avalible to spoil enemy shooting solution? Rookie would spin (exluding Alb;-) ) and ace woud ride on the edge. 
Somtimes you can shoot dozens of rounds when enemy is doing slow unlaoded trun without imediate result and this also feels unrealistic. More hit boxes and visual representaton, less under the hood propablistic theory please, spars can be broken not only becouse of G. AI defensive circle turn is crap and leads only to one end results. 

 

That's very interesting. Would you say that the AI flying this way is unrealistic? After all, an "Ace AI" should at least attempt to mimic a human pilot.

 

When I say human pilot, I mean: an actual real WWI pilot, not a human player.

 

 

I don't think that it's impossible for the devs to code the AI to fly tightening turns. In RoF you can fly with mouse controls and the "AI" that flies your plane has no trouble whatsoever turning tighter than the AI. Could this be a conscious decision? It's a genuine question, especially considering that the AI was recently updated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, J5_Hellbender said:

For the purpose of this thread [...] we assume that [...] the problem with wingshedding [...] is specific to multiplayer.

 

Do we? I find that very unlikely. Is this based on anyone's testing?

 

Since the AI can apparently adjust to the exact damage they receive, I believe the only way to test this is actually getting hit by them and then do some hard maneuvering.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, J2_Bidu said:

Do we? I find that very unlikely. Is this based on anyone's testing?

 

Since the AI can apparently adjust to the exact damage they receive, I believe the only way to test this is actually getting hit by them and then do some hard maneuvering.

 

Obviously if you get hit by AI and turn the same way you would against a human player in multiplayer, you'll also lose your wings.

 

The AI, on the other hand, very rarely loses its wings when they get damaged, but instead unloads them further. This typically leads to them dying faster to human players than other human players, but not always. A human player might expect that a Camel will lose its wings if you damage them slightly, but with an AI at the controls he'll have to finish the job some other way, or really shoot the wings to pieces.

 

At least for a plane which is expected to dive away from danger (SPAD, Pfalz) rather than outturn it, this would mean that the problem doesn't lie with the DM, but with gunnery accuracy against a fleeing machine.

Edited by J5_Hellbender
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, J5_Hellbender said:

 

 

 

The AI, on the other hand, very rarely loses its wings when they get damaged, but instead unloads them further. 

The AI very rarely does anything, including turning, damaged or undamaged. 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as human pilots and MP, it's incomplete. There aren't environmental indicators of over-stress. The G-meter wasn't a bad idea to tell you how many G's you're pulling, and that's something you'd feel in the cockpit is the force pulling on you. But there's no creaking, snapping, or much in the way of visual indicators as to what is happening. You see a few holes, but then the wings fall off when you try to turn. And wouldn't there be a different sound when the enemy's bullets hit the heavier wood spars, as opposed to just passing through fabric? Maybe you need a strong force feedback joystick system (?) to help give some kind of feel. But if you're like me with just decent but basic stick (T16000), it's just Whoosh and the wings are gone. With no force feedback and no indicators, you're trying to fly and watch the G-meter, in the middle of a fight, which is hard to do. I've given it some time and it's better than it was, but it's still frustrating. I am willing to give it a little more time for me to adjust, but in the end, it just eventually prove to be time to take a step back and time away from this game.

Edited by Krispy_Duck
  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, J2_Bidu said:

 

Do we? I find that very unlikely. Is this based on anyone's testing?

 

Since the AI can apparently adjust to the exact damage they receive, I believe the only way to test this is actually getting hit by them and then do some hard maneuvering.

 

AI in Sizzlor's maps are stupid.  Put some holes in a wing, extend and descend and watch them snap as they try to pursue you.

 

20_A_Lacacci knows.....he had 55 AI 2 seater kills last month.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Krispy_Duck said:

Maybe you need a strong force feedback joystick system (?) to help give some kind of feel.

I'm using a msffb stick and I feel very little and that's cranked up high as it'll go. Only thing I really feel in the stick is when I'm in a stall or when the plane is so badly damaged it shakes like what your seeing when hit. You don't feel the hits as it's happening. Nor do you feel anything when hit by a few rounds. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Krispy_Duck said:

Maybe you need a strong force feedback joystick system (?) to help give some kind of feel. But if you're like me with just decent but basic stick (T16000), it's just Whoosh and the wings are gone. With no force feedback and no indicators, you're trying to fly and watch the G-meter, in the middle of a fight, which is hard to do. I've given it some time and it's better than it was, but it's still frustrating. I am willing to give it a little more time for me to adjust, but in the end, it just eventually prove to be time to take a step back and time away from this game.

 

41 minutes ago, NO.20_W_M_Thomson said:

I'm using a msffb stick and I feel very little and that's cranked up high as it'll go. Only thing I really feel in the stick is when I'm in a stall or when the plane is so badly damaged it shakes like what your seeing when hit. You don't feel the hits as it's happening. Nor do you feel anything when hit by a few rounds. 


I'm using a refurbished MSFFB2, "new" since about a year or three and it has very strong stick forces at 50% force setting. I find 100% to feel even closer to the real thing in terms of force required, but my real world experience is with yokes in modern monoplanes, so I could be way off. For some planes, most notably the Sopwith Camel with heavier fuel loads, flying without this force feedback is next to impossible.

 

Definitely something I hadn't really considered as part of the larger picture. You can't really expect people to use a 20 year old out of production stick in order to be able to play your game. The fact that force feedback gives an advantage is fair enough, the fact that it should remain playable without is a given.

 

A realism setting already exists to situationally limit engine RPM in order to avoid engine overrev. How about a realism setting to situationally limit control surface movement in order to avoid wing breakage?

 

It would basically turn WWI elevators into WWII elevators, which don't allow for as much deflection at higher speeds and increasing g loads.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, J2_Bidu said:

I shot down a Camel in my Halberstadt. Putting aside the fun I had doing it (surprise more than antything), it did feel a bit wrong. I was not at all convinced it was a faIr kill.

 

That was me. I was shot up by another player before you, he got a nice burst into my wings. I didn't want to pull hard turns and then you bounced me and finished the job.

 

It was a legit kill, I was surprised but it was believable. 

 

S!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, 1PL-Banzai-1Esk said:

 

That was me. I was shot up by another player before you, he got a nice burst into my wings. I didn't want to pull hard turns and then you bounced me and finished the job.

 

It was a legit kill, I was surprised but it was believable. 

 

S!

 

Thanks for clarifying. So easy to make wrong assumptions! From my standpoint, I had a couple of hits and there go your wings...

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's definately one of the issues here - that we all have our own perceptions of what happened in a particular situation.

Two people both believing that one 'rammed' the other, as a basic example.

And when we have a pre-conceived notion of what we expect to happen, often that's all we can see.

 

There's nothing more unreliable than the eye witness !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dipped a toe back in to test the wing-off festival in MP Flugpark server last night. 

 

AI Halb CL.II dived after me and lost its wings.  I only got the kill because it kept coming at me after I had given it a small amount of damage.  The server statistics say I damaged it 7.3%.

 

http://stats.jasta5.org:8000/en/sortie/log/75332/?tour=20

 

I disengaged with a shallow dive away in my SE 5a and the AI chased after me in a shallow dive too.  4 minutes later into the chase I watched it over my shoulder behind me still chasing me as it shed its wings and crashed.

 

Strange days indeed.

 

Happy landings,

 

56RAF_Talisman

 

P.S.  The AI Halb was streaming a trail of white fluid behind it from early in the fight, so I presume some of my shots hit and damaged the radiator.  So not all my shots were wing damage and I was not specifically aiming at the wings.

Edited by 56RAF_Talisman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's one for you - a nice glimpse into how 4.006 has affected the SPAD pilot. 
 



(Dr.I Pilot's skin disabled so that he can retain his anonymity if he wishes) 

Let's break this down for a minute. The SPAD took a 
single visible hit, which was enough to cause wing failure. The SPAD might have been hit more than once, but from the visual cues it was a single shot that caused the wing to come off. The visual DM would also indicate that the SPAD's wing was only very lightly damaged. The instant the SPAD pilot tried to exit the dive - boom. Wings gone. And that wasn't an aggressive pull, either.  

Fortunately on this track the SPAD pilot performs a very similar dive before being hit. You can see in the dive immediately preceding the 'fatal' one that, under undamaged circumstances, the SPAD can absolutely handle a dive like that. I'd say the pull-out from that dive might even have been more aggressive. 

The SPAD did fly through a friendly stream of bullets - with two visible hits. It does appear that the wings were already severed before those rounds hit, though. The pilot didn't even know he had been hit at all - the first indication was when his wings came off. 

Note that the SPAD still has all its wires intact prior to wing failure, and that there was no visual damage on the plane at all before the first round hit. 

The second section of the video is not to discredit the Dr.I pilot - he did a fine job in getting away with his life - but it's rather to show the MASSIVE disparity now seen between different types of aircraft. The Dr.I dived vertically downward in a similar fashion to the SPAD multiple times. Obviously, it won't be as fast, but the manoeuvre was the same and the Dr.I had taken much more punishment than the SPAD had. 

In this situation, I don't know what the SPAD could have done differently. He had numbers and height on his side, and was killed by (apparently) a single stray bullet while recovering (gently) from a dive that he had already initiated. Meanwhile, his opponent is riddled multiple times and continues to be able to fight in the vertical with impunity. 

This, unfortunately, is the SPAD meta right now. And no, it's not a one-off. I saw a very similar thing happen to another wingman the night before, and earlier that day on the ST server I'd seen at least six SPADs suffer the same fate. Very similar behaviour - the SPAD breaking apart the second any Gs are put on the wings, can be seen in Adam's video (in which he lost his wings after the parser recorded 5 rounds): 
 



I get the whole 'spar damage' thing but, to me, that is absolutely insane and, honestly, really takes the wind out of my sails when it comes to FC. I won't bother again with the whole "Historically, the SPAD was tough" spiel, but something really just doesn't look right there. Especially not when the SPAD (in both examples, actually) still has its bracing fully intact. 

Who knows. Maybe the French are just sending the 93rd dodgy Spads. 

I'd like to get the parser stats but they aren't in yet - I'd also like to recreate the 'fatal' dive and the Dr.I dive offline to see how many Gs were pulled, roughly. 

EDIT: Parser results are in. Here's what they say: 

-- KIA SPAD was damaged 0.9% by AA fire prior to engagement - whatever that translates to, there was no visual damage on the aircraft. The SPAD was then damaged 0.2% by the Dr.I. One second later the damage rockets up to 100%. There is no recorded damage from the other SPAD (a friendly fire message popped up in-game). That puts the total parser-recorded damage at 1.1% when the wings came off. This isn't a good indication of structural damage, but I think it is a good indication of how little the SPAD was hit by gunfire / AA. 

-- Dr.I fired 671 rounds, with 21 recorded hits. This was spread over an AI S.E.5a (5.3% damaged, 12% wounded, not shot down), the SPAD that was downed (0.2% damage inflicted) and the other SPAD (also 0.2% damaged - one visible wing hit in the track). 

-- KIA SPAD fired 116 rounds and scored 20 hits. He only registered hits on the Dr.I. 

-- Other SPAD fired 502 rounds and scored 52 hits. He, too, only registered hits on the Dr.I. 

--My SPAD fired 172 rounds and scored 102 hits. This was distributed over the Dr.I and an AI D.VII earlier on. I'd say approx. 100 - 110 rounds were fired at the AI D.VII. 

-- Dr.I was recorded as 20% damaged exactly. 0.5% of that is given as non-combat damage by the parser. 





 

Edited by US93_Larner
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The video posted by the Snarling Trolls is a good indication. Camels folding wings and a D7 at the end being just peppered endlessly and continue to fly (shaking like hell as well). I even considered flying there when I saw the video, since they have blue vs red missions and in a furball server you can just respawn, but the way things are, it is really hard to watch. I'm not sure the game has any use right now. In some planes, you just can't have any hits, and even if you fly the D7, the shaking does not look realistic at all. Some things have to go, we are in 2020 (yeah, I know, it's been a hell of a year, literally). 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, J28w-Broccoli said:

 

Just to clarify- It isn't the same.  That speed changes everything, which @J5_Hellbender and others have pointed out in other threads.

 

Not to discredit your entire post.  Just pointing out this one thing.


Cheers - I am taking the speed into account, and that's exactly why I want to do the G-tests at some point - to see just how big of a difference there is between the two dives. I would like to say in return that I chose my words carefully there - the manoeuvre, is the same. A very steep and fairly elongated vertical dive followed by a gentle recovery (or lack thereof in the SPAD's case). 

EDIT: To clarify, I'm not saying "Hey! That SPAD's wings fell off so the Dr.I's should too!" - but I think that the video clearly shows that there is a DRASTIC difference between the two aircraft's resilience to damage - certainly, the SPAD apparently doesn't have any resilience at all (which presents both a historical probl-no, I said I wouldn't mention that again here. And, absolutely, a gameplay issue that is really affecting the SPAD - which, unless I'm being ignorant (likely), this thread is attempting to discuss) 

EDIT 2 (Disclaimer): I'll reiterate just for anyone in here reading the thread that, yes, I am a big-time SPAD fanboy. Try not to die of shock from that mind-blowing revelation.  BUT - I am trying to be as objective as I can when talking about my impressions regarding the '4.006 SPAD'.  In short, to me it feels like the 'new' 4.005 Albatros, and I can't perceive any improvement over 4.005 in regards, specifically, to this plane.

Edited by US93_Larner
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@US93_Larner Can you please explain to us how, despite the flawed damage model and the way it affects the SPAD, you, flying always the SPAD, have such a long virtual life with (I shall guess) close to 100 kills?

 

I shall dare to give the answer myself because I believe that I do the same as you do. You are flying as if you have one life to spare.

 

I enter this discussion with a big respect and gratitude to everyone making constructive and, if possibly, documented criticism to any flaws of the game. This is something that I cannot do due to lack of knowledge on how a plane behaves with so much damage or with so many Gs or of first hand accounts of WWI pilots etc. The voice of people who can support their arguments might make a better game that I and the rest of us can enjoy.

 

What I know is that if I break a tool while using it, the next time I shall apply less stress on it, so that I shall not break it.

 

I quote here a former J2 pilot:  ''Any amount of damage is too much. If you are hit, return to base at the first chance and re-plane.'' Rings a bell Larner?

 

I am living to this axiom. I always urge J2 pilots to live by this axiom. Yes, it is frustrating to fly for 40 mins, to spot a contact, to miss your chance for a critical hit, to be hit by a single bullet and then to run away because you are afraid of your plane's integrity. And this certainly does not satisfies the pilots who are just looking for a brawl to enter and their flying ability ends in cutting sharp angles.  And I am not saying that the damage model we have is right, but I do not either know if it is wrong.

 

If I understand what I have read, a real pilot would get a 'feeling' either on the stick or on the vibration of his crate indicating that some damage is taken and alerting him that a specific threshold should not be crossed. Then, a real pilot should have an 'escape window' or be obliged to play by the enemy's rules. We do not get that alert stage, at least not always. So, one should adhere to the 'any damage is too much damage' or suffer the consequences unexpected as they might be.

 

Are we, in the game, flying as a real WW1 pilot would? Are we conscious that we are 'flying' a wood and cables held-together contraption? Maybe we were used in doing things a WW1 pilot would not dare to do, preferring to take his chances against the enemy machine guns instead of breaking his machine in the air? I don't know, I can only wonder.

 

If I can express just a small like-minded portion of this community and if I can offer some advise to the people reading this topic and thinking 'the game is broken, I am not playing it', I say:

 

think before you engage - balance your advantages and disadvantages against the enemy machine - disengage if you are not sure of your victory - behave as if you have one life to spare

 

Maybe this flying pattern is how the few 'ace' WW1 pilots  that we remember and quote today were distinguished from the thousand nameless pilots that fell before having the chance to learn.

 

Taking a deep breath...and clicking 'Submit Reply'

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...