PDA

View Full Version : @Oleg: Pilot ability restriction list



BBB_Hyperion
08-09-2006, 03:47 AM
Add things pilot should be restricted to do while doing other things or general pilot limits.

-While Hand is at trimm wheel only right or left hand force can be applied to stick or maybe none at all 2 hand trimmwheel.

-While deploying combat flaps or retract them pilot has only 1 hand on the stick and gets restriction for pullforces like previous point.

-Pilot hangs overhead in his belts ability to hang in the revi position is greatly reduced.

-Pilot gets tired from high g effects and needs time to recover.

-Pilot is not glued to the revi position the plane shakes and drifts while inflight

-Monotone tasks such as prop pitch and engine rpm and realistic overrev assumed have to be done on none automatic planes. So tasks that are blended out now are essential (maybe a difficulty option) and the automatic engine control is of some use.(The situation now is you have the same work on manual planes than on automatic)

maheikki
08-09-2006, 04:48 AM
1. No ability to shoot under high G-forces.
2. Constant high Gs tire pilot down.

These ones would be enough for me.

PapaFly
08-09-2006, 05:01 AM
Good points!
I vote for PILOT FATIGUE as a key factor. It's often mentioned by veterans in their combat stories.

JG4_Helofly
08-09-2006, 05:07 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

Pilot fatigue would be a great improvement to increase realisme of aircombat. No more 7g dogfights or servo rudders for unrealistic hard manoeuvers. Plane performances would not longer be the one and only factore. You would be able to outturn a 109 with a p 51 or such things which are only possible with pilot fatigue.

Oh Oleg please please add this to bob if it's not already done.

faustnik
08-09-2006, 09:47 AM
Great ideas Hyperion! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

F6_Ace
08-09-2006, 10:46 AM
Some thoughtful extras to some aged requests there!

Something I've suggested before is a sort of 'role playing' element where you pilot can build up G tolerance if he's alive long enough. I've never played CFS3 campaigns long enough to know what difference the 'pilot attributes' made but it would seem reasonable for offine campaigners and a good incentive for people to stay alive.

maxenthor
08-09-2006, 10:54 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif
Sounds good to me!

joeap
08-09-2006, 02:38 PM
Some good ideas there I expect they are for BoB though.

NonWonderDog
08-09-2006, 03:48 PM
The one-handed things were suggested a while ago. I thought they were a bad idea then, and I still think they're a bad idea.

The problem is the transition. Say if you were pulling hard on the stick with both hands, you'd be using 85% force to keep from stalling. If you adjust the throttle, your stick force would halve, so you'd have to pull the stick further (!) to get to 50% force. When you were "done" messing with the throttle, your stick force would presumably double, giving you 100% force and forcing the plane into a snap roll.

About the only way to do this would be a key you would have to hold down for "two hands mode." I guess you could even put a "fatigue limit" on it or something. That would do nothing to get rid of the transition from one-hand to two-hands, however, and since you'd presumably only use "two-hands mode" when you were already at your full stick travel, the problem would be at its worst.

Even if there's a smooth application of the extra force, you'd need to master the unnatural skill of releasing pressure on the joystick in time with the application speed if you were to use "two-hands mode" in anything but the fastest dives. Dogfights should NOT be decided by such nonsense.


The other suggestions are good, though.

p1ngu666
08-09-2006, 06:57 PM
vomit for stick stirring and fatigue from environmental conditions http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

BBB_Hyperion
08-09-2006, 11:50 PM
Originally posted by NonWonderDog:
The one-handed things were suggested a while ago. I thought they were a bad idea then, and I still think they're a bad idea.

The problem is the transition. Say if you were pulling hard on the stick with both hands, you'd be using 85% force to keep from stalling. If you adjust the throttle, your stick force would halve, so you'd have to pull the stick further (!) to get to 50% force. When you were "done" messing with the throttle, your stick force would presumably double, giving you 100% force and forcing the plane into a snap roll.


That is the idea and you dont need to pull the stick further but to hold it in that position, with pilot abilities modeled there is a strain on the hand and slowly or fast he/she gets tired and must release if pressure is on stick. Like it is irl. There is a need to keep hands on stick on hard manouevers.



About the only way to do this would be a key you would have to hold down for "two hands mode." I guess you could even put a "fatigue limit" on it or something. That would do nothing to get rid of the transition from one-hand to two-hands, however, and since you'd presumably only use "two-hands mode" when you were already at your full stick travel, the problem would be at its worst.


No key but autotransition if anything is done in the cockpit a hand is needed or maybe 2.



Even if there's a smooth application of the extra force, you'd need to master the unnatural skill of releasing pressure on the joystick in time with the application speed if you were to use "two-hands mode" in anything but the fastest dives. Dogfights should NOT be decided by such nonsense.


That is indeed a good point . IRL you have to do it. Of course on a pc it is a little problematic so as described earlier . Holding with 1 hand gets pilot tired faster of course with 1 hand less force can be applied and sooner pressure must be released.

Attaching 2 Hands allows again to hold the position without oversteering but allows now to apply more force than before would be a good compromise.

polak5
08-10-2006, 12:03 AM
All that stuff would be soo hard to model. But i think its a great discussion im always looking to make the sim more immersable http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

sg1_gunkan
08-10-2006, 01:29 AM
This realism will destroy the gameplay. Just imagine the most of the planeset weren't able to make two tight turns. Russian and japanese players will never asume this reality.

I am with BBB_Hyperion, but Oleg's will never ever implement something like this. Angle fight was a defeated tactic in real WW2, but not in IL2FB.

Great dream indeed. Perhaps another sim developer. Oleg's have already said that the BOB FM's will be similar.

Note: FW190 was a one handed plane, and Flaps were electrical. BF109 were a well know two handed plane and using flaps in combat was simply impossible. Generaly BF109 pilots give a little of flaps BEFORE starting combat, but only some aces.

Tipo_Man
08-10-2006, 02:00 AM
I agree about the first 2 points.
I don't agree about pilot fatigue and etc limitations
The game is interesting, because you have more than hundred planes, each having different pros and cons.
If pilot abilities are given such a priority, than it'll be like flying all the same plane.

Maybe than we should be able to choose between different pilots characters.
One having better sight but worse hand->stick force, other having higher G-load-blackout but worse turning/leaning abilities.

I think this would be stupid...and not historical at least.

BBB_Hyperion
08-10-2006, 02:39 AM
Originally posted by Tipo_Man:
I agree about the first 2 points.
I don't agree about pilot fatigue and etc limitations
The game is interesting, because you have more than hundred planes, each having different pros and cons.
If pilot abilities are given such a priority, than it'll be like flying all the same plane.

Maybe than we should be able to choose between different pilots characters.
One having better sight but worse hand->stick force, other having higher G-load-blackout but worse turning/leaning abilities.

I think this would be stupid...and not historical at least.

The RPG style would surely allow more realism as it was but i would prefer same start values to compare.
That is indeed a problem. 109 pilots mostly were strong guys cause of the high control forces. So when other pilots compared the 109 it had heavy controls not used to it.

Even when it is a small drawback for such aircraft which require strong pilots ,all pilots should be the same from fatigue point. I doubt that it would be like flying all the same plane. Some planes need intensive maintenance during flight others not. It will surely end the hoovermode turning dfs as there is no point in it when pilot gets tired and you cant demand more pulling when needed and therefore lost the fight .

WOLFMondo
08-10-2006, 02:57 AM
I'd like this to be an option, and up to players/server owners.

RegRag1977
08-10-2006, 05:39 AM
Great ideas Hyperion! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Sintubin
08-10-2006, 09:30 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

Odirroh
08-10-2006, 01:38 PM
Realizing these ideas would catapult the game onto
a higher level of realism.

How can Oleg be convinced to realize these ideas?

Odirroh

BBB_Hyperion
08-10-2006, 04:22 PM
Originally posted by Odirroh:
How can Oleg be convinced to realize these ideas?
Odirroh

Post Ideas , Making a list of it and surpass Olegs Spam filter somehow maybe with a crazy idea http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

p1ngu666
08-10-2006, 07:20 PM
tnb planes would be able todo more than 2 tight turns. think of modern aerobatic planes for example. and they do alot of neg G stuff, which is worse.

plus racing drivers sustain high g alot, but in different directions. they can pull 5g under braking tho http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

incidently, i like the equal pilot thing. besides if a 109 pilot is stronger, then theres only so much he can be, otherwise he will be like goering. cant fit in http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

the russian planes have higher stick forces, so would they be even stronger?. a flew a mig3u at really high alt vs 109s yesterday. 109 could turn 30%+ tighter, very easily. i couldnt get near there turn rate in the mig at all

Treetop64
08-10-2006, 08:30 PM
Some great ideas here, though I think the "hand swapping" stuff mentioned earlier is just a bit over-the-top to justify the pain in typing and optimizing the code to make it work properly for gameplay. But I love the pilot fatigue ideas, and I'm surprised that it hasn't been implemented in our current product already.

I think one key thing to realize is that, for example, the Bf-109 cockpit was so confining that it was virtually impossible for the pilots to use full aileron deflection, their legs got in the way of the stick movement. Another point, again with the 109, is that the control stick was comparitively short, so the faster the craft flew, the more physically exacting it became to apply stick pressure. Hence the "heavy" controls at high speed we hear so much about with the 109s. Why some fans of 109s argue against this so much is beyond me...

At the risk of stating the complete obvious, it would be nice to see "physical" limitations imposed on the AI as well.

alert_1
08-11-2006, 12:56 AM
would bwe nice to have for ex those new commands: tighten belts - you'll be able to take high g but cant check six fully, lose belts - just opposite http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

HellToupee
08-11-2006, 08:51 AM
nice ideas but not so easy to implement

Imagine have just 10 or so new keys to control seatbelts 2 hands on stick etc it would become a real hassle to control basic functions that a real person does not even really think about. Then how do u display information how do u know how tired the pilot is, is his seat belt done up where are the pilots hands etc, moving head around unable to see revi is fine but what about when u need to aim, sure thats fine when flying around manovering but when u need to shoot how do u get ur pilots head to sit still something that u wouldnt need to think about u just do probly another button u have to press.

Most of these things are about simulating the person, not the machine, simulating to be a person thru a computer is not really something that can be done with any accuracy.

p1ngu666
08-11-2006, 10:18 AM
indeed helltoupee. and if u assign most of the commands in il2, then u have basicaly NO keys left.

either not have stuff like the belt thing, or do it automaticaly.

BBB_Hyperion
08-11-2006, 11:10 AM
Why keys ? All should be automatic transitions in the routine of flying.

Maybe indicated by occupied icon when something is done in the cockpit.

The idea with the belts isnt that bad either looking over your shoulder is hardly possible with belts full on . Need more thinking how it could be automatic without too much restriction in combat.

RedDeth
08-12-2006, 05:17 PM
american pilots in G suits would dominate with these rules if in place.

are you going to model that too?

how about motion sickness random chance on quick manuevers?

how about the fear of being shot up by cannon fire affecting your flying ability?

i can go on and on with this. how many things do you wish to add to the game?

everything?

i have an idea....lets make it so difficult almost everybody leaves...

i think these ideas are VERY bad for the game.

JG4_Helofly
08-13-2006, 04:26 AM
I think these ideas are VERY good for the game, but of course it' not possible to model all things correctly. Oleg should start with fatigue with g forces.

I don't know why people think that the gameplay would be destroyed or all planes would fly the same. First, il2 and bob are supposed to be simulations and not arcade shooter games. If you what a game with well balanced planes and where aiming skill is the most important than you should try flight games on xbox. We are talking about a simulation don't forget it!

Next point. If all planes will fly the same with such an option than in RL all planes were flying the same??? What has pilot fatigue to do with handling ability or speed or,...?

If such a system is not implanted we will never have realitic dogfights. For fw 190 it will always be hit and run and for spit it would only be turn turn turn... . (just an exemple)
In RL also good turn fighters flew boom and zoom if they had an advantage.

In RL pilots must fly with the brain and not only with strong armes.

p1ngu666
08-13-2006, 06:25 PM
i think its important to model the environmental effects.

for example at higher altitude than your opent, u will be a)colder, possibly really cold, b)the sun is more intense, the lack of oxygen produces a effect similer to drunkness, and u can "forget" howto operate equipment if your oxygen equipment stops working for whatever reason, and u may not notice.

plus the change in pressure etc... the higher u are, the more issues u should have.

so the hero bnz flier should be worse off, than his equal lower alt victim at the start.

plus when he bnz's the fast change in alt will have a effect, plus he will likely pull resonable G aswell. its not as cut and dried as ppl want to think, in favour of the bnz planes as ppl want to think

LEXX_Luthor
08-13-2006, 10:35 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

RedDeth::

how about the fear of being shot up by cannon fire affecting your flying ability?
:
:
i think these ideas are VERY bad for the game.
This thread offers some Cheesy ideas indeed. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif However, FEAR in combat is the first independent thinking idea yet in this thread. Very interesting creative thinking.

Hey pingu, you wish to apply Aviation Medicine to flight simming. Trust me, Online community here won't like that idea -- oxygen deprivation, Online dogfight servers modelling sleepy 4 hour flying P-51 pilots over Germany, etc... The Online BnZ community wants only "gee force" related Pilot Stamina applied to TnB players, because the BnZ players cannot surprise Bounce the TnB players because the servers have to use Oleg's arcade Text Icons, because the BnZ players cannot see the invisible Dots against the cheesy terrain below.

In addition -- nothing excites the Online BnZ player more than the prospect of throwing away all that Initial Energy Advantage to burn in the weeds with their Bounced victim. The real WW2 pilots, the successful pilots, flew off with that energy to other more vulnerable targets when they missed their Bounce instead of engaging in Dogfight shooting deathmatches with an alerted opponent ramping up his/her throttle after surviving the first surprise Bounce.


As for the really bizzare post about Bf-109 pilots being stronger from stick forces. Well you see, Bf-109 pilots all limped from one being far stronger than the other from one legg stomping on the rudder. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

p1ngu666
08-14-2006, 08:39 PM
yeah luthor, if we could set the pilots health, and damage to plane too, in FMB u have some powerful narrative/story telling devices. but also a set of tools to fudge things to how u think they should be.

for example, u could have your hero bnz pilot in his 190 for example, and his victim, a spitfire.

hero bnz pilot thinks spit turns too good, climb/speed, e retention etc. so he sets the pilot to starved/thirsty, maybe wounded too. then sets damage so all control surfaces are in ribbons, plus some dragy damage.

or u might have a mission where your catching a lift on a say a b25, when your attacked, and u the fighter pilot are the only one who can fly (pilot dead/incapacitated) and your wounded too, and u haveto bring the plane in to land because someones parachute is in tatters.

OR u could be a injured fighter pilot, who is "escorting" the wounded bomber. i read a account of a spit pilot who did that, (via his brother) this wounded dueo shot down a handful of lw fighters, spit bnz the attackin lw of the bomber (obivously they saw the easy 400 points http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif) and the bomber gunners got the ones after the fighter http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

as to RPG eliments, i suspect there will soon become a best "build" like there is in guildwars, for certain types.

i think its really important to have these emotive things, because thats what we love about the sim. the sunsets, the jjjuuuuuuuust making it back to base with a wounded plane, the pencil in the tb3, the skins.

the things we hate, like the sound,trees/forests,limited view range for smoke and fires. its often because its unemotive..

Abraxa
08-17-2006, 09:48 AM
Hi Hype, nice to read you again. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Excellent ideas! I subscribe.

HFC_Dolphin
08-18-2006, 07:33 AM
What has been proven all these years, is that however difficult the game gets, most people still can play it and have fun. Do you forget the endless discussions about having the padlock on/off or icons on/off?

So, yes, I agree in making it more "realistic", as long as we have the switch to choose in between new model and old (FB) model, until the community chooses what's best for it.

Manu-6S
08-18-2006, 08:59 AM
I like some ideas, but not all.


Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:
Add things pilot should be restricted to do while doing other things or general pilot limits.

-While Hand is at trimm wheel only right or left hand force can be applied to stick or maybe none at all 2 hand trimmwheel.

<span class="ev_code_blue">Difficult: might need a key for 2-hands like say before.</span>

-While deploying combat flaps or retract them pilot has only 1 hand on the stick and gets restriction for pullforces like previous point.

<span class="ev_code_blue">Simple: add a 1-2 seconds shake when flaps change position</span>

-Pilot hangs overhead in his belts ability to hang in the revi position is greatly reduced.

<span class="ev_code_blue">I don't like it</span>

-Pilot gets tired from high g effects and needs time to recover.

<span class="ev_code_blue">Simple (and wonderful, as said in other threads): G effect are calcualted yet... need only a variable with the total fatigue (fatigue always decreases slowly, some effects increase it fastly)</span>

-Pilot is not glued to the revi position the plane shakes and drifts while inflight

<span class="ev_code_blue">Simple: LOL every plane like our P51... people will kill you; If I understand well you want the pilot visual shaking, not the revi itself; good idea.</span>

-Monotone tasks such as prop pitch and engine rpm and realistic overrev assumed have to be done on none automatic planes. So tasks that are blended out now are essential (maybe a difficulty option) and the automatic engine control is of some use.(The situation now is you have the same work on manual planes than on automatic)

<span class="ev_code_blue">Difficult: good idea, but hard ti implement.. it's a lot code...</span>

BSS_Vidar
08-18-2006, 11:24 AM
My second flight in an F/A-18 Hornet. (The first was just FCLP's - Field Carrier Landing Practice.)

In responce to Pilot fatigue...

I slept for a good 9 hours the night before my first mid-morning 1 v 2 engagment in an F/A-18 Hornet. The flight was logged as a 1.8 hour ACM -Air Combat Manuevering- hop. After be-brief, I drove back home, laid down and woke up 12 hours later.

Some of the planes in this game do NOT have consistance aero-medical factors emplimented on the aircrews; However, wearing the pilot down as the mission prgresses, especially after hight G maneuvering may even things out a bit.

S!

L33T-Zoolander
08-19-2006, 03:26 AM
Originally posted by RedDeth:
american pilots in G suits would dominate with these rules if in place...

The first G-suit was developed by a team led by Wilbur R. Franks at the University of Toronto's Banting and Best Institute in 1941. The G-suits were made to be used by the Royal Air Force pilots during the war.

L33T-Zoolander
08-19-2006, 04:07 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
This thread offers some Cheesy ideas indeed. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif However, FEAR in combat is the first independent thinking idea yet in this thread. Very interesting creative thinking...

How about a simple K/D server record calculation that allows your pilot:
A - an adrenaline boost.
B - to soil his pants.

I think a lot of folks are forgetting that most WW2 pilots had some pretty good training, which includes physical training. Uhmm, not the 'sitting in front of a computer monitor for hours on end' kinda training that makes your butt shaped the same as your chair.
Also, the fighter pilots were tough little smurfs about five-six.
I'm in pretty good shape, but I'm six feet tall and weight two hundred pounds, so it's physically impossible for my heart to keep the same kinda pressure to my brain as a little shroom person. If I did make the cut, my stature would dictate I'd be driving bombers and not fighter planes.
It's common sense. When I raced motorcycles I won a few races on 250s and open class bikes, but DNFed every 125cc event I entered.
In real life you are what you is, but in the game I is what I ain't. I.e. a five foot six, 165lb. mofogga with eyes like an eagle and fists of steel! It's all part of what makes the game fun.
I certainly don't want a G limitation equivalent to a 350lb diabetic who can't climb two sets of stairs without a rest in between. If I can finish a 40 minute moto in real life, then my little shroom persona can handle 40 seconds of T&B.

TX-Gunslinger
08-19-2006, 04:09 AM
Many good ideas, which I support, as long as they are implemented with the precision under which they have been concieved.

For example - will reclined pilot seats offer less g-effect build up?

Will aircraft with electric trim which is engaged by finger press be represented?

Will aircraft with very low stick forces be adequetly represented?

Case in point - FW190 series. Trim changes to tighten turns with small, electrically operated trim switch are historically documented. Even if you remove one hand from an FW's joystick, then what loss in potential control surface movement will you have effected, considering that the aircraft has very low stick forces to begin with?

I can hear some people screaming after they experience the reality of this, althought they certainly won't be FW drivers.

Again, great ideas, increased immersion offered in a scalable manner would please me.

S~

JG4_Helofly
08-19-2006, 05:09 AM
The stick forces are important but also difficult to programm. The problem is: how can you know how much force you need to move the stick x degrees at y speed with plane z ? If you base your arguments on "it was known that the plane ... got light stick forces" there will be much more discussion about that than on FM.
That left the question: Is it possible to finde some precise numbers about stick forces? Is it possible to calculate them?

This would be very important in pilot fatigue, but without precise numbers not possible.

I think, first a fatigue model only with g force influence would be enough. One standart pilot model for all and loose of strengh after some high g manoeuvres. This would already be very radical in the way dogfights would be fought.
After that stick forces could be implanted if we have numbers.


(my point of view)

p1ngu666
08-19-2006, 10:10 PM
nah, i think u need everything in, todo it properly, tnb aircraft do have advantages.

the trim thing is interestin, ive never thought of the force required to move them. always thought it was negible amount, whatever the plane.

how about modeling cramp and dead legs, from holding the rudder ? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

wonder how the reclined seat effects normal sitting, comfort, that sort of thing. but the 190 was a nice plane to fly, from the pilots viewpointhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

trying to think of some bad ones, can only think of drafty bomber crew positions, deffo need to model the wakey wakey pills http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

ah!, the early typhoon cockpits where pretty naff.

Xiolablu3
08-25-2006, 09:58 PM
Excellent ideas Hyperion.

Would cut down on exploits AND make the game more true to life.

LW_lcarp
08-27-2006, 12:21 AM
If pilot fatigue is represented then another thing that should be is plane fatigue. How many stories are out there about pilots taking off and having to turn around because of engine problems or whatever. Or even of the plane shedding its tail section or wing do to war wearyness.

And then where does it stop should pilot morale be modeled. Or the pilot had a bit to much to drink at the pub the night before. Or the ground crew was in a hurry and forgot to do something.

Maybe Oleg could model in that you dont get to fly for the first hour because your plane was assigned to someone else.

Or after you land your plane with holes in it you get to sit out for a day as your ground crew is busy repairing the damage.

Or your commander is a bit peeved at you so you have to go peel potatoes for a day.

Sure its all fine and dandy but where would it stop.

BBB_Hyperion
08-29-2006, 07:02 AM
Unfurtunately the Plane Ability list landed in GD http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

OldMan____
09-09-2006, 09:27 AM
Originally posted by TX-Gunslinger:
Many good ideas, which I support, as long as they are implemented with the precision under which they have been concieved.

For example - will reclined pilot seats offer less g-effect build up?

Will aircraft with electric trim which is engaged by finger press be represented?

Will aircraft with very low stick forces be adequetly represented?

Case in point - FW190 series. Trim changes to tighten turns with small, electrically operated trim switch are historically documented. Even if you remove one hand from an FW's joystick, then what loss in potential control surface movement will you have effected, considering that the aircraft has very low stick forces to begin with?

I can hear some people screaming after they experience the reality of this, althought they certainly won't be FW drivers.

Again, great ideas, increased immersion offered in a scalable manner would please me.

S~

exactly.. this ais a must to have a ralistic Fw with its realistics advatages. ALSO SOME us planes would have advantage with G suits.


On my point of view that would be the most important evolution if added in BOB. Muvch more than new FM and graphics.

OldMan____
09-09-2006, 09:28 AM
Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tipo_Man:
I agree about the first 2 points.
I don't agree about pilot fatigue and etc limitations
The game is interesting, because you have more than hundred planes, each having different pros and cons.
If pilot abilities are given such a priority, than it'll be like flying all the same plane.

Maybe than we should be able to choose between different pilots characters.
One having better sight but worse hand->stick force, other having higher G-load-blackout but worse turning/leaning abilities.

I think this would be stupid...and not historical at least.

The RPG style would surely allow more realism as it was but i would prefer same start values to compare.
That is indeed a problem. 109 pilots mostly were strong guys cause of the high control forces. So when other pilots compared the 109 it had heavy controls not used to it.

Even when it is a small drawback for such aircraft which require strong pilots ,all pilots should be the same from fatigue point. I doubt that it would be like flying all the same plane. Some planes need intensive maintenance during flight others not. It will surely end the hoovermode turning dfs as there is no point in it when pilot gets tired and you cant demand more pulling when needed and therefore lost the fight . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

nope.. 109 guys were usually fit because they were forced into exercises at land quite more than most other airforces did.

BBB_Hyperion
09-11-2006, 07:52 AM
Originally posted by OldMan____:
nope.. 109 guys were usually fit because they were forced into exercises at land quite more than most other airforces did.

For a reason of course .)

OldMan____
09-11-2006, 09:09 AM
Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by OldMan____:
nope.. 109 guys were usually fit because they were forced into exercises at land quite more than most other airforces did.

For a reason of course .) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yes. Just pointing that they did not gained muscles inside the cockpit :P In fact usually they were capt chained toa huge wooden and metal mill (the type that usually horses move). And they were kept spinning that stuff alone for 2 years before entering LW :P Only when they were strong enough to break the chains with bare hands they were alowed to pilot.

BBB_Hyperion
09-11-2006, 09:32 AM
I think you mixed vvs with lw pilot training .)

OldMan___
09-11-2006, 03:39 PM
no no no. You know very well that VVS piltos were allowed to fly on yaks only after they proved they could make a T34 takeoff and make a hammerhead.

-HH-Quazi
09-12-2006, 06:39 AM
If they would ease the blackouts & redouts up some, pilot fatigue would be good imho. I have spoken with a real world fighter pilot from WWII that flew Hellcats, Wildcats, & SBD's starting at Guadal Canal until the wars end. He tells me the blackouts & redouts happen way to quickly than they did in a real df. Having pilot fatigue effect how fast he BO & RO's happen dynamically would probably be a better effect and a bit more realistic.

Zoom2136
09-12-2006, 12:02 PM
I've got an idea... any of you guys know about a game called EVE Online...

SoW could have a similar system were you could:

A) Chose you're class of pilots... fighter or bomber; and,
B) Distribute (let's say 10 aptitudes points) between defferent "skills")
These skills could be as exemple (STAMINA(important for fighter pilots having to sustain a lot of G's), REFLEXES (also important for combat pilot so that all control response are crips and fast), NAVIGATION (could be more important to bomber pilots (to find their way to target (could be modeled by more info shown on their map)), RESISTANCE TO ELEMENTS (hot/cold, fast change in altitude, oxygen depreviation and so on) STRENGH, etc...

Also when your pilot gains combat experience (without getting killed) is aptitude could be increase... a little for time flying and more for "combat victories" (succ. bombing/kill). Should take a very long time to max out all categories...

What you think... this way no two pilots would have the same aptitude to begin with... this would do two things....

Give online player distinc "personalities"...
On serious server prevent the kill at all cost attitude...

P.S. on online server when a player get kill no experience should be given for such a flight... and given on 100 % succefull landing. 100 % ditched and lived (in friendly terr), 50 % bailed and lived (in friendly terr) and 0 % in all other events... This would stop a "/$%?from crashing into (parashoot shooting) a veteran just for the hell of it...

NonWonderDog
09-12-2006, 12:10 PM
Originally posted by -HH-Quazi:
If they would ease the blackouts & redouts up some, pilot fatigue would be good imho. I have spoken with a real world fighter pilot from WWII that flew Hellcats, Wildcats, & SBD's starting at Guadal Canal until the wars end. He tells me the blackouts & redouts happen way to quickly than they did in a real df. Having pilot fatigue effect how fast he BO & RO's happen dynamically would probably be a better effect and a bit more realistic.

Keep in mind, however, that you're never aware of blacking out until you wake up. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif The sim will never be realistic in that respect.

Grey outs are a different matter entirely, of course. They may happen a bit too fast, but without feeling the pain of pulling 6G, it's really hard to tell.

Red outs I do take issue with. You start to red out at 0G. Just flying upside down will make your vision go mostly red. I've never been at strong negative Gs, and I don't ever want to be, but most people I've heard from say that redout doesn't happen at even -3G.

TheGozr
09-12-2006, 03:52 PM
Total BS

BfHeFwMe
09-12-2006, 08:25 PM
What, the current training wheels aren't enough? You can't hardly stall anything now days, the automatic saftey limiters won't allow it.

The old days were far more fun with planes like the P-39 and 109's which would loose it if hamfisted hard. But everythings been so blandly equalized for those screaming equal game play under the guise of realism.

Reality check, the only way to build up G tolerance is pull them regularly and often. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

TheGozr
09-13-2006, 12:20 PM
Reality check, the only way to build up G tolerance is pull them regularly and often.
--
Well yes 100 % agree

OldMan____
09-14-2006, 09:45 AM
Originally posted by Zoom2136:
I've got an idea... any of you guys know about a game called EVE Online...

SoW could have a similar system were you could:

A) Chose you're class of pilots... fighter or bomber; and,
B) Distribute (let's say 10 aptitudes points) between defferent "skills")
These skills could be as exemple (STAMINA(important for fighter pilots having to sustain a lot of G's), REFLEXES (also important for combat pilot so that all control response are crips and fast), NAVIGATION (could be more important to bomber pilots (to find their way to target (could be modeled by more info shown on their map)), RESISTANCE TO ELEMENTS (hot/cold, fast change in altitude, oxygen depreviation and so on) STRENGH, etc...

Also when your pilot gains combat experience (without getting killed) is aptitude could be increase... a little for time flying and more for "combat victories" (succ. bombing/kill). Should take a very long time to max out all categories...

What you think... this way no two pilots would have the same aptitude to begin with... this would do two things....

Give online player distinc "personalities"...
On serious server prevent the kill at all cost attitude...

P.S. on online server when a player get kill no experience should be given for such a flight... and given on 100 % succefull landing. 100 % ditched and lived (in friendly terr), 50 % bailed and lived (in friendly terr) and 0 % in all other events... This would stop a "/$%?from crashing into (parashoot shooting) a veteran just for the hell of it...

nono no and no. NO RPG please. But maybe an option for soemthing like Enemy Terrotiry had. In a same game (a map ina DF server) you can gain experience for very small advantages (like being able to select certain planes (decided by host), longer black out resilence) etc...

p1ngu666
09-14-2006, 03:09 PM
some RPG would be good, on the other hand not...
plus there would be a "best" build, like u often get in guildwars..

triggerhappyfin
09-16-2006, 07:17 AM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
... otherwise he will be like goering. cant fit in http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



Hermann got that thick because he had this theory...A fat pilot sticks in his place no matter the position of the plane. a fat pilot aim as good in normal flight as in inverted... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

F6_Ace
09-16-2006, 10:42 AM
RPG would be good. That way, us F6 aces could build up some top notch pilots then flog them on ebay to make a few quid.

Oleg? If you implement it, I'll give you 10% of what I earn from it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

bienenbaer
09-17-2006, 11:10 AM
Yeah, ..., great game. In order to to reach full physical fitness for 6g Oleg could for example request you to make 200 knee bends in front of the barracks. You would

- every morning before you go to work switch on the computer and direct your role model in front of the barracks, where the squadron leader and his staff stand at the the flag mast. Then you click 200 times the right mouse button - not too slow and not too fast - to gain maximum fitness. If you do it too slow or too fast, you do not get the right amount of physical fitness points.

- every evening when you come back from work you first switch on the computer and then ... you click 200 times the right mouse button, not to slow and not to fast.

And if you don't do that regularly, then you get negative character points and will not be allowed to fly the planes and the AI wingman will not come to help you p!$$-offer. And if you haven't done it regularly for some time, then you're sent to the punishment aquadron where you have just one aircraft to fly: the Heinkel Lerche.

Oh, how I loved being in the military ...

Or, I could quit the military, become a cvilian, earn and spend money, while buying software that I am actually allowed to use in full content.

Henkie_
09-18-2006, 06:40 AM
lol http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

i like the 200 mouseclicks.

whatabout 2000 mouseclicks and you get a special powerup to go through a blackout or redout like nothing happened? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif