Jump to content

Discussion of Flying Circus II Announcement


Recommended Posts

I'd settle for D.XIV (D.XII with overcompressed Benz.Bz IVü engine lifted from DFW C.V). Equally nonexistent on frontlines as D.XIIf, but with glorious pipeworks :) .

(As long as this 1918 engine finds its way to the DFW C.V, too, instead of 1916 BZ.IV we have in RoF).

 



File:Pfalz D.XIV fighter front view 1918.jpg - Wikimedia Commons

Pfalz D.XIV

 

Edited by J2_Trupobaw
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/26/2021 at 10:22 PM, Chill31 said:

A N28 should be a really sweet flying plane.  The wing shedding was its only downfall.

 

An original restored N28 at Old Warden... look how quickly it gets into the air on its take off run.

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/26/2021 at 5:22 PM, Chill31 said:

A N28 should be a really sweet flying plane.  The wing shedding was its only downfall.

I hope you are correct, but if they just import the FM from ROF then it will be a POS. The N28 couldn't turn fight its' way out of a paper bag in ROF. If you adopted BnZ then you could hold your own sort of. Hoping for much better in FC2.

 

S!Blade<><

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

An original restored N28 at Old Warden... look how quickly it gets into the air on its take off run.

 

We used this exact video to demonstrate that the takeoff roll of the N28 was too long and that its tail had to lift off way earlier. This was fixed by the devs in RoF 1.034.

 

https://riseofflight.com/forum/topic/44725-version-1034/

 

4. Adjusted: Nieuport 28.C1 FM - "Heavy tail on takeoff" issue fix;

 

 

7 minutes ago, BladeMeister said:

I hope you are correct, but if they just import the FM from ROF then it will be a POS. The N28 couldn't turn fight its' way out of a paper bag in ROF. If you adopted BnZ then you could hold your own sort of. Hoping for much better in FC2.

 

S!Blade<><

 

I do, too, though it's a discussion that has been had ad nauseam, both on the public and on the now defunct RoF beta forum. The N28's FM isn't any better or worse than that of the Albatros D.Va, Pfalz D.IIIa, SPAD XIII, DFW C.V or Breguet 14. Except for the Fokker D.VII which had an FM review sometime after 777 took over from neoQB, these are all original release FMs and they're simply not as refined as the later ones, starting with the Sopwith Camel (ca. 2010).

 

The Albatros and Pfalz should "stall sharply and spin vigorously", and by extension the Albatros D.III and D.II shoudl be redone as well. Both the DFW and Breguet have pretty simplistic FMs and even more simplistic DMs. The SPAD XIII is typically considered as the "gold standard" FM, though it's also by no means perfect. In terms of wing loading it should be a better turning machine than the Albatros and Pfalz, and only really fall short of the Fokkers.

 

The N28 is just the more blatant example. As discussed above, simply making it a better turning machine would not be representative of its actual performance in combat: shedding fabric in a dive and igniting fuel lines. So it should be made better, but also worse at the same time. I fear that there is perhaps little interest and financial gain to be had from revisiting these older planes. Hence I'd rather just see new planes developed with far more attention to detail (Snipe, Siemens, Rumpler...) and some engine variants added to existing planes.

 

 

But Bender don't you want a historical simulation of everything! Shouldn't we take our business elsewhere?!

 

Yup, and I'll let you know as soon as my 100% historically accurate WWI flightsim hits the market. Starting with the Hanriot HD.1, of course. Estimated release: ~2035

 

Back me now on OnlyFans.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep Bender is right, FM revisions of neoQB build planes made by long gone employees? Forget about it.

 

With today tools, knowledge and crafsmashift skill of 1C, devs would build way better FMs but resources vs benefits give that no chances to come. New aeroplanes gonna get that new better modeled FMs plus minor fixes to olds ones and we should be happy 😉  

 

 

BTW Meanwhile new issues arises like broken control surfaces damage model (imaginary and simplistic rods jamming) and simplistic wings dm modeling with end result of weak wings shedding (probability distribution rather human visual clues) but no resources  and relative low interest in ww1 to make it better for us loyal customers...

Edited by 1PL-Husar-1Esk
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, =IRFC=Hbender said:

4. Adjusted: Nieuport 28.C1 FM - "Heavy tail on takeoff" issue fix;

 

Good to know.  Now all we have to do is prove 'heavy airframe in flight', which will be a lot trickier.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it's a shame that WW1 falls by the wayside a bit, but the imminent arrival of FC2 and the sort of but not really confirmation of FC3 is promising! There's no doubt that there are new players making their way into FC - hopefully the community will continue to slowly but steadily grow.   

For me currently the most glaring issue with FC (surprise, surprise) is the DM. The state of wing strength is debatable, but in my opinion the loss and especially the jamming of control surfaces is a glaring inaccuracy in the current WW1 sim experience - and I am a little concerned that it'll turn new players away if they're constantly losing controls in every fight they get into. 



 

Edited by US93_Larner
  • Upvote 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, US93_Larner said:

For me currently the most glaring issue with FC (surprise, surprise) is the DM. The state of wing strength is debatable, but in my opinion the loss and especially the jamming of control surfaces is a glaring inaccuracy in the current WW1 sim experience - and I am a little concerned that it'll turn new players away if they're constantly losing controls in every fight they get into. 

 

There was at least some thought involved when the DM was adjusted, which is apparent from @AnPetrovich's replies in this thread, and I can imagine that they must be quite perplexed to get this amount of criticism from the community.

 

The problem is that while losing wings and control cables may have been a more common occurence than we like to believe (the poor bastards that had it happen never got a chance to write about it), it was not the most common occurence. If someone who typically flies IL-2 then stumbles into FC, has a go at multiplayer and his experience is chiefly loss of wings and control cables, it's not at all representative of WWI combat — and he may leave for good with the wrong impression.

 

What we should be worrying about almost constantly is:

  • unfixable gun stoppage
  • some degree of random mechanical failures
  • fabric shedding and wing vibration/failure in a dive (especially on Nieuport 28 and Albatros D.Va)
  • a far greater likelihood of engine fires, especially after blipping
  • wing bending and airframe overstress before catastrophic failure

 

Right now we're racing cars round a racetrack, and the only danger is complete failure of brakes, or wrapping your car around a tree.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, =IRFC=Hbender said:

The problem is that while losing wings and control cables may have been a more common occurence than we like to believe

With losing control cables (btw which had double redundant  wires) and can't be jammed i'm totally fine. What we have now is unrealistic simulation ,control surface can be jammed by push rods which they were not existant on most ww1 aeroplanes! This has other consequence - one side jammed  aileron will block other side, elevator was slipt into two and had redundant wires for both sides but in game elevator push rod will jamm whole surface at once when hit. All this is fatal to the plane when during hit your control surface was deflected, you can't compensate with working one. Lost (broken cable or control horn)  control surface or half of it should flutter  freely on the air and you should fly by compensating. 

 

 

VDp7slk.jpg

 

QAiWAwr.jpg

Edited by 1PL-Husar-1Esk
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, =IRFC=Hbender said:

a far greater likelihood of engine fires, especially after blipping


On this point, has anybody noticed how inconsequential engine fires have become? It seems like every plane I set on fire these days has extinguished itself within 5 seconds...

...to the point where while 'sparring' in 3PG training sessions we've gone from "Oh shit, a fire! You got me!" to "Pff. fire. Hang on, let me just dive this out and keep fighting". Certainly doesn't feel like the number one terror of air combat like all the memoirs suggest! 

Perhaps worth writing a bug report for that one...

Edited by US93_Larner
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, US93_Larner said:

On this point, has anybody noticed how inconsequential engine fires have become? It seems like every plane I set on fire these days has extinguished itself within 5 seconds...

...to the point where while 'sparring' in 3PG training sessions we've gone from "Oh shit, a fire! You got me!" to "Pff. fire. Hang on, let me just dive this out and keep fighting". Certainly doesn't feel like the number one terror of air combat like all the memoirs suggest!

 

Let's put it this way: German pilots may have had more or less reliable parachutes by the end of the war to be used in case of an engine fire; the RFC had extremely reliable revolvers throughout.

 

 

Quote

Perhaps worth writing a bug report for that one...

 

I've used up all my bug report cred for the next 6 months with the invisible Fokker D.VII. Right now my main concern is the invisible Hanriot HD.1.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, =IRFC=Hbender said:

Let's put it this way: German pilots may have had more or less reliable parachutes by the end of the war to be used in case of an engine fire; the RFC had extremely reliable revolvers throughout.


Eeeeexactly...doesn't seem worth the trouble or added weight (ha!) of taking either atm...

There were cases of aircraft managing to extinguish themselves (One poor bastard from the 213th dived out a fire in his S.XIII only to be killed a couple days later, and IIRC Arthur Lee's pup started simmering for a second before quickly going out, much to his relief), but currently in-game it seems like it's harder to get a fire to stick on an aircraft than it is to have it extinguish. Just the other night I saw two different D.VIIs in track recordings that caught fire only to instantly extinguish (so quickly that I hadn't realised either were even on fire until watching the footage back) 

Edited by US93_Larner
Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I should build a FC campaign down the road - no radio comms to either annoy me, or hassle creating myself.

 

I’m surprised at myself, but missing WWI a bit. Back in RF days I just wanted WWII back. Of course it was the Zero I was dreaming of in that regard.

 

I might have to put some FC love on my long term to-do list.

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

From my reading of comments made by devs, FC has lagged because of funding (ww2 is more popular). Now with a commitment to FC 2 and likely FC3, and having a larger player base more work on FC in general seems likely , incl improvemnts to Damage Model. I think FC shortfalls have largely been not a case of lack of interest by the developers rather it's based on financial viability concerns, it has to be profitable. So I'm feeling more confident we will get there. The larger the player base the better.

Also making these products is not just about the player controlled planes and vehicles but the other assets too that make a sim come alive and slowly over time we have seen these , the more funding and interest the better the products producted will be. I believe we will see more and more of the things ppl want improved happen over time.

I def have an interest in both WW1 and WW2 (and modern combat sims), so they get my money WW1 and WW2. No question IC/777 are making some of the best ww2/1 combat sims.  I'm a fan of all combat sims(each has merits, I'm certainly not a fanboy of anyone of them), even if they are not made by this dev, GB is not the only combat sim that I play, but just because I like other similar products does not mean I like these any less.

 

 

Edited by =RS=Stix_09
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

The N.28 has been somewhat of a riddle to developers of various sims for decades.

 

In the original Red Baron, it was a dog and missing one machine gun. In RB3d it was a not a bad performer and we used to use it a lot in MP as a "middle of the road" type plane. The squadron I was in at that time much preferred it over the Spad. In WOFF it's not a bad plane, again kind of a middle-of-the-road type thing. In RoF it had a heavy tail issue and seemed not to turn as well. I guess the heavy tail was fixed eventually.

 

I'll be interested in seeing how the FM turns out because the simulators I've played over the years never seem to have reached a consensus on how the plane handled or what it could do. The wild card is the DM, which could trump everything if the control issues are prominent on the plane.

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, US28_Baer said:

N28 set to be first plane for FC2.

 

Interesting choice. So, the Hanriot scout next for the Italian front along with Macchi flying boat fighters and Caproni bombers. Should be a good map with alps and water and stuff when they get around to it. But I may be getting ahead of myself.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, NO.20_Krispy_Duck said:

The N.28 has been somewhat of a riddle to developers of various sims for decades.

 

In the original Red Baron, it was a dog and missing one machine gun. In RB3d it was a not a bad performer and we used to use it a lot in MP as a "middle of the road" type plane. The squadron I was in at that time much preferred it over the Spad. In WOFF it's not a bad plane, again kind of a middle-of-the-road type thing. In RoF it had a heavy tail issue and seemed not to turn as well. I guess the heavy tail was fixed eventually.

 

I'll be interested in seeing how the FM turns out because the simulators I've played over the years never seem to have reached a consensus on how the plane handled or what it could do. The wild card is the DM, which could trump everything if the control issues are prominent on the plane.

 

 

Well, she had 2 machine guns in the RB3D. She was a primary Entente fighter plane for the 1.PL in the RB3D times, as she was fast (200kph), and it you could perform b'n'z or turn fight with the German planes (D.VII was our choice for the CP)

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, NO.20_W_M_Thomson said:

The N28 was the best by far, no lies, King of the hill, Nothing could touch it with out a doubt, cream of the crop with doing the PLANK TURN. That's all it needs. So line and get your lessons here.  

 

The Plank Turn™ for the unitiated.

 

U2jxNKe.jpg

tenor.gif

  • Haha 4
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/4/2021 at 1:18 PM, BraveSirRobin said:

I would never even consider trying to take credit for the “Plank turn”.

I don't know who drew this but hats off to them! hahaha

Link to post
Share on other sites

No matter how hard I tried or how much I practiced, I just could never get the bandit to remain stationary long enough for me to go from A to C before they flew through the "beat zone".   

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...