Chill31 Posted April 11, 2021 Posted April 11, 2021 On 3/2/2021 at 4:00 AM, =IRFC=Hbender said: 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 What makes you say engine fires after blipping? So far, I don't know any rotary engine pilots who have fire problems after blipping...the only one where I could see it becoming a real issue is the Gnome series that do not have carburetors. Even then, I am not hearing about fires from blipping. It must take quite a long blip to get that much fuel in the cowl.
BMA_Hellbender Posted April 11, 2021 Posted April 11, 2021 2 minutes ago, Chill31 said: What makes you say engine fires after blipping? So far, I don't know any rotary engine pilots who have fire problems after blipping...the only one where I could see it becoming a real issue is the Gnome series that do not have carburetors. Even then, I am not hearing about fires from blipping. It must take quite a long blip to get that much fuel in the cowl. Primarily with the Gnome Monosoupape, yes, but it was a pretty common (if expensive) engine. Some Camels had a 9(B/N), so did some Pups, the Airco DH2 and a whole bunch of German scouts equiped with the Oberursel U.I.
Monostripezebra Posted April 16, 2021 Posted April 16, 2021 The collectors vehicle for FC should be this one, though: 4 2
the_dudeWG Posted April 22, 2021 Posted April 22, 2021 Just wondering ... (and I may have missed this question being asked before), but do we know if the FC2 map with be one big map like RoF, or three separate maps; Arras, Verdun, and Reims. I seem to remember hearing Jason state that it will be one big map, but then how could they roll it out in phases? Are we going to have a big "hole" in the map where the Reims part will be for an extended period? I don't see how they plan to implement this. S!
unreasonable Posted April 22, 2021 Posted April 22, 2021 Possible reading of the developer announcement as per the Steam page is that the Phase II map sections will come with FC2 (ie an expanded Arras and a Verdun map) and the Phase III with FC3, each as separate maps. Once they have done all of them they will combine them into one big one (in addition?). Having an expanded Arras and Verdun joined at the corner would indeed be very odd. I would have done the Reims section first, but I am just pleased that they are going for the big map area, although expanding a little north to the seaside would also be nice, (especially for Belgians).
No.23_Gaylion Posted April 22, 2021 Posted April 22, 2021 (edited) Would be separate like their current ones I'd imagine. The jump to Verdun makes sense because there you have your eddie rickenbacker/usas single player career to be included in fc2. Edited April 22, 2021 by US213_Talbot
the_dudeWG Posted April 22, 2021 Posted April 22, 2021 But the description really points to a complete, large map that adjoins all the different sectors: Flying Circus: Volume II Map The map we will build for FC2 will be much larger than our FC1 map and will aim to re-create the huge Western Front battlefield we created in our original WWI title – Rise of Flight. Of course, this map will use our latest map technologies which is currently showcased in our Arras map of Flying Circus: Volume I. This new map will be built in two phases. Phase I which is the Arras Map, was the testbed for making a WWI map in the Sturmovik engine and has been completed. Phases II and III will expand that work to eventually, over two product dev cycles, complete the map. We plan to make multiple seasons for this map to allow maximum opportunities to fly in various weather conditions. Also, once the larger map is completed, we plan to offer it to FC1 users. We have designed each map phase to match the plane-set for each volume and the battles those planes participated in. By time FC3 is complete, the map itself will be whole and an amazing canvas to fly and fight over. My guess is that it there will be a Verdun map (to use alongside our existing Arras map) until the Reims area is complete, and then both the Arras and Verdun maps get absorbed into the large FC2 map.
HeavyCavalrySgt Posted April 22, 2021 Posted April 22, 2021 (edited) I'm really glad that the devs took on FC2. ROF has been feeling dated as the updates and new aircraft releases have slowed, and FC1 didn't feel like a replacement with a limited aircraft set and - especially - no campaign mode. Edited April 22, 2021 by HeavyCavalrySgt clarity 1
the_dudeWG Posted April 22, 2021 Posted April 22, 2021 (edited) 16 minutes ago, US213_Talbot said: Would be separate like their current ones I'd imagine. The jump to Verdun makes sense because there you have your eddie rickenbacker/usas single player career to be included in fc2. I was thinking the same with regards to the US squads. What was that huge airfield they shared with a bunch of other squads for a period down there? I can't wait to see that field in FC2. Edited April 22, 2021 by the_dudeWG
unreasonable Posted April 22, 2021 Posted April 22, 2021 (edited) Just now, the_dudeWG said: I was thinking the same with regards to the US squads. What was that huge airfield they flew out of for a period down there? I can't wait to see that field in FC2. Could be Toul or Colombey les Belles. You might like this site: https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?ie=UTF8&t=h&oe=UTF8&msa=0&mid=1pDXGgFPVkTp4k1ZIOQXh4ZwnVM0&ll=48.76571535518509%2C6.076459131785508&z=10 edit: come to think of it, it might be useful for the devs, if they have not seen it already. Edited April 22, 2021 by unreasonable 2 2
Ace_Pilto Posted April 23, 2021 Posted April 23, 2021 So we have memebombers for idiots who waant to spawnkill people in multiplayer? How about the career? Any progress? 1 1
BMA_Hellbender Posted May 3, 2021 Posted May 3, 2021 4 hours ago, JG1_Butzzell said: Any update or news about fixing the DM? According to the last interview with Jason from Stormbirds, they’re thinking about it. For now I recommend flying a SPAD or a Fokker (or an N28 or Pfalz if you want to meme). 1
ST_Catchov Posted May 3, 2021 Posted May 3, 2021 Oh geez I don't wanna fly a Spad or Fokker (D7)! It sounds like an old WW1 board game I had as a kid where these were the only choices. American I think. Set in 1918 when they won the war for us. So Jason's still just thinking about it huh. For God's Sake don't anyone say the L word that rhymes with hazy .... 3
Patricks Posted May 3, 2021 Posted May 3, 2021 1 hour ago, ST_Catchov said: Oh geez I don't wanna fly a Spad or Fokker (D7)! It sounds like an old WW1 board game I had as a kid where these were the only choices. American I think. Set in 1918 when they won the war for us. So Jason's still just thinking about it huh. For God's Sake don't anyone say the L word that rhymes with hazy .... US didn't "win the war" for anyone, but they paid for it in more ways than one.. as they did in WWII. WWI Powers Population (million) Dead soldiers Russia 164 1,811,000 to 2,254,369 Serbia 3.1 275,000 United States of America 98.8 117,000 Australia 4.5 61,966
BMA_Hellbender Posted May 3, 2021 Posted May 3, 2021 (edited) 3 hours ago, ST_Catchov said: Oh geez I don't wanna fly a Spad or Fokker (D7)! It sounds like an old WW1 board game I had as a kid where these were the only choices. American I think. Set in 1918 when they won the war for us. So Jason's still just thinking about it huh. For God's Sake don't anyone say the L word that rhymes with hazy .... Well, the SPAD was instrumental in winning the war in the air in the hands of the French, Americans, Belgians, Italians and even British until they fully transitioned to Dolphin and S.E.5a. What isn't quite right is how the British planes all lose control cables seemingly at random with very little damage. Even the otherwise tanky Bristol can lose all its controls from a single lucky prophang, but is then saved by its adjustable stabilizer working as backup elevator, as is the S.E.5a. And of course the D.VII is the D.VII. There's not much to say about it because it was almost flawless. The Dr.I is a whole other story, and it's a bit silly watching them slowly lose altitude in ever more insane turnfights with wings missing while being swatted down by multiple Entente planes. "Oh, I think he's going in this ti— nope, he's recovered." Meanwhile one bullet in a Dolphin wing and provided you haven't lost your control cables already, you better RTB if you don't care to lose it. BTW, I would never call the devs lazy or insult their work in any way. When something is obviously wrong you bring it into question respectfully and preferably with data. The DM issue is very complex and we don’t have the deep inside knowledge of the sim’s engine as they do. What we do know is that wood and fabric planes do not fundamentally absorb bullet damage in different ways. In fact mostly they don’t absorb bullets and they pass through harmlessly. It’s the same with parachutes: if you shoot at a parachute you will end up with a parachute with holes in it. It’s still a parachute. If you shoot at a human being or an engine, those holes are more problematic, hence meat or metal. Edited May 3, 2021 by =IRFC=Hbender 3
1PL-Husar-1Esk Posted May 3, 2021 Posted May 3, 2021 All goes to the same , if they can find resources to fix FC dm model , they win us all , today's multiplayer community is full of bad opinions about wings and control surfaces dm implementation. This voice is heard from players which build multiplayer community , encourage others to buy, send gifts, made tutorials or skins , help new players, organize events and do more for genre and get what in return ?
No.23_Gaylion Posted May 3, 2021 Posted May 3, 2021 2 hours ago, Icer said: US didn't "win the war" for anyone, but they paid for it in more ways than one.. as they did in WWII. WWI Powers Population (million) Dead soldiers Russia 164 1,811,000 to 2,254,369 Serbia 3.1 275,000 United States of America 98.8 117,000 Australia 4.5 61,966 Welllllllllll...... We used dumb tactics that the French and Brits TOLD US was a bad idea... I recommend "The Last Battle" by Peter Hart.
unreasonable Posted May 3, 2021 Posted May 3, 2021 50 minutes ago, =IRFC=Hbender said: BTW, I would never call the devs lazy or insult their work in any way. When something is obviously wrong you bring it into question respectfully and preferably with data. The DM issue is very complex and we don’t have the deep inside knowledge of the sim’s engine as they do. What we do know is that wood and fabric planes do not fundamentally absorb bullet damage in different ways. In fact mostly they don’t absorb bullets and they pass through harmlessly. It’s the same with parachutes: if you shoot at a parachute you will end up with a parachute with holes in it. It’s still a parachute. If you shoot at a human being or an engine, those holes are more problematic, hence meat or metal. Neither would I - except for obvious proof reading errors in the GUI and tech specs. I do not agree that bullets mostly "pass through harmlessly", except in the specific case of firing from directly on the beam or from directly over or under. Shot at from somewhere in the rear or front quarter, a significant proportion of hits on the aircraft are going to pass through pilot, engine, fuel tank or wing spars: it is just a matter of geometry. Firing from dead six it is quite difficult not to hit one of these areas. We all know about the pilots who managed to RTB with many holes in their crates: but they were the lucky ones. I very much doubt the DM has got the geometry wrong. What is more contestable is how a hit on any of those areas will affect the target, but again I doubt this is way out. (The control rod/ stuck surfaces issue does look like a WW2 induced artefact.
BMA_Hellbender Posted May 3, 2021 Posted May 3, 2021 34 minutes ago, unreasonable said: Neither would I - except for obvious proof reading errors in the GUI and tech specs. I do not agree that bullets mostly "pass through harmlessly", except in the specific case of firing from directly on the beam or from directly over or under. Shot at from somewhere in the rear or front quarter, a significant proportion of hits on the aircraft are going to pass through pilot, engine, fuel tank or wing spars: it is just a matter of geometry. Firing from dead six it is quite difficult not to hit one of these areas. We all know about the pilots who managed to RTB with many holes in their crates: but they were the lucky ones. I very much doubt the DM has got the geometry wrong. What is more contestable is how a hit on any of those areas will affect the target, but again I doubt this is way out. (The control rod/ stuck surfaces issue does look like a WW2 induced artefact. I agree, when I'm being sprayed, almost no matter the angle, I would expect most bullets to miss anything critical, some of them to hit a critical part of the plane (engine, fuel tank, radiator), some of them to damage the main wing spar, some of them to hit me, and a minority to damage the control cables and/or column. So I'm more or less on board with the wings DM (though the undamaged 10g Pfalz has already been disproven). What I don't agree with is how frequently I lose control cables but don't get engine damage or get wounded. Either I'm very (un)lucky or there's something wrong with the hitboxes. Conversely certain planes, such as the SPAD, N28, Fokkers and Pfalz appear to be mostly immune to both critical wing damage and control failure. But I don't see them catching fire or getting wounded more often than I am, so their planes appear more "tanky", which obviously doesn't make any sense. 1
BladeMeister Posted May 3, 2021 Posted May 3, 2021 Didn't Jason say a long time ago, with the last round of DM changes for the WWII Warbirds, that the two damage model systems, WWI & WWII, were tied together? I seem to remember him stating that a separation of the two, WWI & WWII, systems would be necessary to reconcile the problems induced upon the WWI crates by that last round of GBS DM changes. Does anyone else remember reading this and has there been any work in the background going on to introduce this evidently much needed change? Seems like this would be a Priority for 1C to complete to open up future expansion of sales for both products. It seems this disatisfaction with the FC DM from the community would have been taken seriously by now as the grumblings seem to be growing exponentially. Just some observations from one that lurks in the FC background awaiting the much vaulted Hanriot HD.1 Oh well, back to ROF & WOFF PE for a while longer. S!Blade<>< 2 1
No.23_Triggers Posted May 3, 2021 Posted May 3, 2021 (edited) 56 minutes ago, =IRFC=Hbender said: Conversely certain planes, such as the SPAD, N28, Fokkers and Pfalz appear to be mostly immune to both critical wing damage and control failure. But I don't see them catching fire or getting wounded more often than I am, so their planes appear more "tanky", which obviously doesn't make any sense. Have to disagree in the case of SPAD. Definitely doesn't feel like it's immune to either from my experience. Fokker seems possibly a little worse off for control loss than the others - N28 was a very pleasant surprise in that it seems to be pretty rare that its controls will be shot out... AFAIC, controls being shot out either needs to go or needs to be seriously reduced. Controls jamming needs to go. Wings on Sopwiths / Alb / Halb / SPAD / S.E. are just too weak. I don't know about how durable spars are, but I really don't think that Harmless* hits are modelled at all. Every bullet seems to do some kind of structural weakening. *As in, bullets that would pass through the empty canvas without hitting a critical part of the airframe specifically. The most egregious example I've seen is with the CL.II. There have been many times where I've put a well-aimed burst directly through the fuselage of a Halb, only for its wings to suddenly fold up. Edited May 3, 2021 by US93_Larner 1
US41_Low Posted May 3, 2021 Posted May 3, 2021 If the damage models are tied together, perhaps adding some bullet dispersion would help so that we aren’t shooting pew pew lasers.
Trooper117 Posted May 3, 2021 Posted May 3, 2021 1 hour ago, BladeMeister said: Didn't Jason say a long time ago, with the last round of DM changes for the WWII Warbirds, that the two damage model systems, WWI & WWII, were tied together? I seem to remember him stating that a separation of the two, WWI & WWII, systems would be necessary to reconcile the problems induced upon the WWI crates by that last round of GBS DM changes. Does anyone else remember reading this and has there been any work in the background going on to introduce this evidently much needed change? Seems like this would be a Priority for 1C to complete to open up future expansion of sales for both products. It seems this disatisfaction with the FC DM from the community would have been taken seriously by now as the grumblings seem to be growing exponentially. Just some observations from one that lurks in the FC background awaiting the much vaulted Hanriot HD.1 Oh well, back to ROF & WOFF PE for a while longer. S!Blade<>< If they don't sort it, it may well impact on future sales... people may not want to pre buy an FC3 if all they are going to get is more of the same. For me I'd say it's a priority. Hopefully it's right up there on the 'to do' list.
Cynic_Al Posted May 3, 2021 Posted May 3, 2021 16 minutes ago, US_Low said: If the damage models are tied together, perhaps adding some bullet dispersion would help so that we aren’t shooting pew pew lasers. That's the answer to one question: 'How can we make it possible to hit a target without managing to aim at it?'. Nobody is asking that.
Beebop Posted May 3, 2021 Posted May 3, 2021 6 minutes ago, Cynic_Al said: 'How can we make it possible to hit a target without managing to aim at it?'. I'm going to have a seminar on that as it seems to be the ONLY way I can shoot down a plane. ?
J2_Bidu Posted May 3, 2021 Posted May 3, 2021 3 hours ago, =IRFC=Hbender said: Meanwhile one bullet in a Dolphin wing and provided you haven't lost your control cables already, you better RTB if you don't care to lose it. I used to think that too. It's the G's. I've had plenty of bullets in my Doplhin's wings. It can still be flown, and can still fight. You just can't pull much, need to make it gentle, as you really should most of the time anyway. 2
BMA_Hellbender Posted May 3, 2021 Posted May 3, 2021 8 minutes ago, J2_Bidu said: I used to think that too. It's the G's. I've had plenty of bullets in my Doplhin's wings. It can still be flown, and can still fight. You just can't pull much, need to make it gentle, as you really should most of the time anyway. That's what I've been doing, lately, keeping things below 3-4G at all times. I haven't lost any wings recently, except when it was obvious that I should (getting them blown off by a bomb blast would qualify). So I'm happy for the most part with wing G tolerances, both damaged and undamaged. Spoiler ...I said for the most part. 1
US41_Low Posted May 3, 2021 Posted May 3, 2021 25 minutes ago, Cynic_Al said: That's the answer to one question: 'How can we make it possible to hit a target without managing to aim at it?'. Nobody is asking that. A realistic dispersion would mean most bullets wouldn’t hit the plane at all unless you were point blank. But I realize getting some realism is a fantasy
BMA_Hellbender Posted May 3, 2021 Posted May 3, 2021 2 hours ago, US_Low said: A realistic dispersion would mean most bullets wouldn’t hit the plane at all unless you were point blank. But I realize getting some realism is a fantasy Bullet dispersion as it exists in RoF today is not realistic. It's meant to simulate heavy turbulence at all times, even when there is none. Of course when you accept the fact that we're aiming on a 2D screen, that it's too easy to walk in the tracers and that little puffs of smoke come off the plane you hit as a form of visual feedback, then some additional dispersion is no longer a stretch. It'll end up being part of the DM fix and we really will be back to square one.
US41_Low Posted May 3, 2021 Posted May 3, 2021 14 minutes ago, =IRFC=Hbender said: Bullet dispersion as it exists in RoF today is not realistic. It's meant to simulate heavy turbulence at all times, even when there is none. Of course when you accept the fact that we're aiming on a 2D screen, that it's too easy to walk in the tracers and that little puffs of smoke come off the plane you hit as a form of visual feedback, then some additional dispersion is no longer a stretch. It'll end up being part of the DM fix and we really will be back to square one. Yes that’s many different ways to say that the gunnery is arcadish and needs a re-work. I too would prefer improved DM, but in absence of that I’d like some gunnery improvements.
Recommended Posts