Jump to content


Photo

FiF - Flying Circus planeset round?


  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

#21 Luftritter

Luftritter

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,704 posts
  • LocationMichigan, United States

Posted 13 March 2018 - 04:09 PM

....The historical data is old and possibly not very accurate as Vonrd stated. That's why I think pilot accounts are actually incredibly valuable in getting the feel of the aircraft correct. I do believe that the devs will do a good job. They have definitely demonstrated a higher competency than other devs in this niche genre.

 

Exactly.  This is why I think it's important to never look at just one pilot's account; instead, an over-all perception based on all of the pilot's opinions that are available, along with plane-vs.-plane statistics (losses, shoot downs, etc.) that may support an opinion.

 

For example:  I've read that Pfalz aircraft were almost always considered more sturdy and strongly built, than their German competitors.  It's also known that they used twin-spars on their lower wings as well as the upper, which is more resistant to twisting forces.  In addition to that, the D.XII was purported to have been a very good diver; in fact, that was their standard maneuver and method of attack, considering their lack of exceptional maneuverability.  Although SPAD and D.XII pilots never flew each other's planes, they did use similar tactics.

 

Yet, in RoF, the D.XII is probably the only plane I know that will quickly self-destruct, due to wing flutter that occurs beginning at a certain speed, which it reaches very easily in a dive. Conversely, the V-strutter Albs, built with single-spar lower wings and which were famously KNOWN to have suffered from wing flutter at excessive speeds, DO NOT suffer from that problem in RoF.  Wing flutter is a characteristic by which the affected wing begins to twist back and forth like a vibration, and ultimately self-destructs.  It's based on speed alone, not excessive forces caused by pulling up (although that would obviously aggravate the problem).  This is exactly how the V-Strutter Albs SHOULD behave, and how the Pflaz D.XII SHOULD NOT behave.  Based on accounts on both sides, the Pfalz D.XII should probably be at least as good a diver as the SPAD XIII is. 

 

An account like that could be one in which an Entente flight leader reported a group of D.XII's that attacked them by diving down on them from high altitude, blew through their formation, and escaped east, and they were unable to catch them.  That would support a high dive speed capability.

 

Anyway, just common sense like that, to support general aircraft characteristics   :) 


"People who believe they are ignorant of nothing have neither looked for, nor stumbled upon, the boundary between what is known and unknown in the universe."  -Neil deGrasse Tyson


#22 Kliegmann

Kliegmann

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 878 posts
  • LocationKenosha, Wi

Posted 13 March 2018 - 04:10 PM

In BoX the DM is based on a component system.  What that means for ROF I'm not exactly sure.  I am also not sure how detailed that component system is.  ie: When rounds hit the engine, does it damage the cooling system, or individual parts of the system.  I do know that the wing has multiple components, ie: the Wing-Root, structural ribs and spars, ect.  A good way to knock down an IL 2 is to fly under it and put rounds into its coolers under the fuselage.  In contrast the current ROF DM is a box system - do enough damage to THIS box and the engine oils and quits working, do enough damage to THAT box and the wing comes off.


  • Luftritter likes this

FIFXXV_ribbon.jpg?dl=0FIF2017winter_smaller.png?dl=0FIF2017spring_small.png?dl=0FIF2017fall_small.png?dl=0


#23 Shadepiece

Shadepiece

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 111 posts
  • LocationThe Rockies

Posted 13 March 2018 - 09:00 PM

As a lot of you will come to find out I am an absolute damage model fanatic!! I believe Rise of Flight is underrated in many ways in the community and the DM is no different. I really like the damage model in RoF, and I really hope that FC will improve upon that with some significance. After all, the reason we fly combat flight sims is the whole damage other aircraft part.
Fire only at close range, and only when your opponent is properly in your sights.

-Hauptmann Oswald Boelcke, Jasta 2

#24 Shadepiece

Shadepiece

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 111 posts
  • LocationThe Rockies

Posted 13 March 2018 - 09:02 PM

In BoX the DM is based on a component system. What that means for ROF I'm not exactly sure. I am also not sure how detailed that component system is. ie: When rounds hit the engine, does it damage the cooling system, or individual parts of the system. I do know that the wing has multiple components, ie: the Wing-Root, structural ribs and spars, ect. A good way to knock down an IL 2 is to fly under it and put rounds into its coolers under the fuselage. In contrast the current ROF DM is a box system - do enough damage to THIS box and the engine oils and quits working, do enough damage to THAT box and the wing comes off.


We should have a conversation soon on these particulars! I find it incredibly interesting.
Fire only at close range, and only when your opponent is properly in your sights.

-Hauptmann Oswald Boelcke, Jasta 2

#25 Butzzell

Butzzell

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,863 posts

Posted 29 April 2018 - 04:28 PM

Is this plane set OK?

German planeset:
Albatros D.Va 18
Fokker D.VII (BMW) 14
Halberstadt cl.II 200hp 2 Arty, 2 Prison rescue

DFW 3 Recon, 8 Bomber, 2 Spy

Entente planeset:
Spad XIII 14
Sopwith Dolphin 18
Bristol Falcon II 3 Recon, 2 Prison rescue
Breguets 8 Bombers, 2 General Capture, 2 Arty

Sopwith Camel 2 Trench attack
 

 

 

There are a couple of things to think about. 

Not a lot of room for progression to phase B.

New guys flying SPADS and Albs


sig8.png


#26 J5_Gamecock

J5_Gamecock

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 244 posts

Posted 29 April 2018 - 05:29 PM

Is this plane set OK?

German planeset:
Albatros D.Va 18
Fokker D.VII (BMW) 14
Halberstadt cl.II 200hp 2 Arty, 2 Prison rescue

DFW 3 Recon, 8 Bomber, 2 Spy

Entente planeset:
Spad XIII 14
Sopwith Dolphin 18
Bristol Falcon II 3 Recon, 2 Prison rescue
Breguets 8 Bombers, 2 General Capture, 2 Arty

Sopwith Camel 2 Trench attack
 

 

 

There are a couple of things to think about. 

Not a lot of room for progression to phase B.

New guys flying SPADS and Albs

 It works, especially if you are looking to use the FC plane set.   

 

Not a lot of room for progression to phase B. 

  What if we start Phase A with N28's and  D(eisel) VII's in place of some of the Spads and VIIF's..(maybe half?)... then replace them all in phase B. You could also replace the Brisfit FII with the FIII then.

 

  Just thinking out loud here.....


  • Butzzell, Luftritter and Vonrd like this

Gamecock,The Kickin Chickin


#27 Pragr

Pragr

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 282 posts

Posted 29 April 2018 - 08:27 PM

Is the DFW the plane which flight endurance is right about two hours? If I remember it right it used to be a problem like two campaigns ago. So I would recommend the Halberstadt CL.II as a bomber instead.


Posted Image

#28 Adler_Blau

Adler_Blau

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 20 posts

Posted 30 April 2018 - 09:00 AM

del



#29 Butzzell

Butzzell

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,863 posts

Posted 01 May 2018 - 09:58 PM

Ok  new plane set

 

Phase A

German planeset:
Albatros D.Va 18
Fokker D.VII (BMW)    7

Fokker D.VII    7
Halberstadt cl.II 200hp 2 Arty, 2 Prison rescue, 8 bomber

DFW 3 Recon,, 2 Spy

Entente planeset:
Spad XIII    7

N-28           7
Sopwith Dolphin 9

SE5a                  9
Bristol Falcon II 3 Recon, 2 Prison rescue
Breguets 8 Bombers, 2 General Capture, 2 Arty

Sopwith Camel 2 Trench attack

 

Phase B

German planeset:

Albatros D.Va 18
Fokker D.VII (BMW) 14
Halberstadt cl.II 200hp 2 Arty, 2 Prison rescue, 8 Bomber

DFW 3 Recon, 2 Spy

Entente planeset:
Spad XIII 14
Sopwith Dolphin 18
Bristol Falcon II 3 Recon, 2 Prison rescue
Breguets 8 Bombers, 2 General Capture, 2 Arty

Sopwith Camel 2 Trench attack


sig8.png


#30 Luftritter

Luftritter

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,704 posts
  • LocationMichigan, United States

Posted 02 May 2018 - 03:02 AM

Phase B, I see that the SPADs replaced the N28's; that makes sense....but also, the Dolphins replaced the S.E.5a's?  That doesn't make as much sense to me.  I would want the S.E.5a's to stay.


"People who believe they are ignorant of nothing have neither looked for, nor stumbled upon, the boundary between what is known and unknown in the universe."  -Neil deGrasse Tyson


#31 Butzzell

Butzzell

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,863 posts

Posted 02 May 2018 - 04:18 AM

Phase B, I see that the SPADs replaced the N28's; that makes sense....but also, the Dolphins replaced the S.E.5a's?  That doesn't make as much sense to me.  I would want the S.E.5a's to stay.

 

 

Ok  new plane set

 

Phase A

German planeset:
Albatros D.Va 18
Fokker D.VII (BMW)    7

Fokker D.VII    7
Halberstadt cl.II 200hp 2 Arty, 2 Prison rescue, 8 bomber

DFW 3 Recon,, 2 Spy

Entente planeset:
Spad XIII    7

N-28           7
Sopwith Dolphin 9

SE5a                  9
Bristol Falcon II 3 Recon, 2 Prison rescue
Breguets 8 Bombers, 2 General Capture, 2 Arty

Sopwith Camel 2 Trench attack

 

Phase B

German planeset:

Albatros D.Va 18
Fokker D.VII (BMW) 14
Halberstadt cl.II 200hp 2 Arty, 2 Prison rescue, 8 Bomber

DFW 3 Recon, 2 Spy

Entente planeset:
Spad XIII 14
SE5a       18
Bristol Falcon II 3 Recon, 2 Prison rescue
Breguets 8 Bombers, 2 General Capture, 2 Arty

Sopwith Camel 2 Trench attack


sig8.png


#32 Shadepiece

Shadepiece

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 111 posts
  • LocationThe Rockies

Posted 02 May 2018 - 03:24 PM

Cooooooollll!!
Fire only at close range, and only when your opponent is properly in your sights.

-Hauptmann Oswald Boelcke, Jasta 2

#33 Adler_Blau

Adler_Blau

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 20 posts

Posted 02 May 2018 - 03:49 PM

What about planets for this spring FIF 2018 ? Why we did not see 1917 after 1916 ? (I see the year at the schedule) So what we will get at FIF 2018 autumn ? I don't understand the logic sorry ...  :huh:



#34 Kliegmann

Kliegmann

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 878 posts
  • LocationKenosha, Wi

Posted 02 May 2018 - 05:16 PM

We're doing the Flying Circus plane set.


FIFXXV_ribbon.jpg?dl=0FIF2017winter_smaller.png?dl=0FIF2017spring_small.png?dl=0FIF2017fall_small.png?dl=0


#35 Adler_Blau

Adler_Blau

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 20 posts

Posted 02 May 2018 - 06:11 PM

We're doing the Flying Circus plane set.

 

Yes, i understand. But i did not want to make new topic, so asked there about current FIF.



#36 Klaiber

Klaiber

    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 10,569 posts

Posted 02 May 2018 - 07:06 PM

Hi Adler,

 

You're correct.  I think the original idea was to do 1916, then 1917 and then 1918 in sequential order.

 

However, after the Flying Circus plane-set was suggested for the Spring Campaign, it was too good of an idea to not use.

 

We hope that it will get everyone excited for the new game.  And, because many of the aircraft are free in ROF, it may get some BoX players interested in giving FIF a chance.

 

So, I guess the better way to look at things is that the Winter Campaign (January to March) represented campaigns that we've played in the past.  And that the Spring Campaign (May to July) will represent campaigns that we could play in the future. :)


Klaiber_tiny_R.png?dl=0
Klaiber_tiny_O.png?dl=0
Klaiber_tiny_FS.png?dl=0

Hals - und Beinbruch!


#37 Adler_Blau

Adler_Blau

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 20 posts

Posted 02 May 2018 - 10:14 PM

We hope that it will get everyone excited for the new game.  And, because many of the aircraft are free in ROF, it may get some BoX players interested in giving FIF a chance.

 

So, I guess the better way to look at things is that the Winter Campaign (January to March) represented campaigns that we've played in the past.  And that the Spring Campaign (May to July) will represent campaigns that we could play in the future. :)

 

Thx for reply ! I understand the reason, but to my mind it is too early to make something related with FC. Jason told "one year". So there is no reason to hurry.

 

:)



#38 Klaiber

Klaiber

    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 10,569 posts

Posted 03 May 2018 - 01:33 AM

That's a good point.  Maybe we can swing back to 1917 in the Fall.


Klaiber_tiny_R.png?dl=0
Klaiber_tiny_O.png?dl=0
Klaiber_tiny_FS.png?dl=0

Hals - und Beinbruch!


#39 BaronVonMyakin

BaronVonMyakin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 35 posts

Posted 03 May 2018 - 06:57 AM

In our land, we say: "Divide the skin of a bear he killed" that could be translate in English as "Count one's chickens before they are hatched"  :lol:

 

This suits perfect to this situation of FC planeset in the FIF Spring. I agree with Adler Blau - no any new update of FC, no any even approximate date of the FC release (or early access) - but the ghost of FC has influenced the logical planeset's evolution of FIF 2018 already.

 

S!

ure?


  • Butzzell likes this

#40 =VS=emely

=VS=emely

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 03 May 2018 - 10:54 AM

We must immediately call the event "Flying Circus"! ;-) And all at once see how the graphics improved :-)
Attraction of participants in this way from other flight simulators is doubtful, and for the time of the advent of this Flying Circus, this will affect no more than playing the drum of an Indian shaman, causing rain. Or the work of these guys on calling planes ;-)
http://aestheticblas...s-dont-land/278
I think it's a desire to do something new without having anything new. The result will be only that there will not be many interesting aircraft on the event.

Attached Files


  • Butzzell likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users