New airplane physics -1 reply

Please wait...

Froggin_Ashole42

My nationality? I'm a mut.

50 XP

4th March 2004

0 Uploads

530 Posts

0 Threads

#1 17 years ago

You know what it is guys, you shouldn't pull so hard on the sticks; pull gently.




Sgt. Baker

Sgt. Hartmann is my hero.

50 XP

10th June 2004

0 Uploads

20 Posts

0 Threads

#2 17 years ago

i agree




AussieZaitsev

Revenge was here.

50 XP

14th December 2003

0 Uploads

1,970 Posts

0 Threads

#3 17 years ago

i keyboard fly ;).




Strikeri

Strong Bad

50 XP

5th March 2004

0 Uploads

34 Posts

0 Threads

#4 17 years ago
The Jackalx2kFlight physics have been changed a bit in the upcoming release.

Have you even made your own flight physics and not just use somebody elses code?




[KsR]SideWinder

Del Monte, I am your father.

50 XP

13th January 2004

0 Uploads

89 Posts

0 Threads

#5 17 years ago

Its what I love about FH, in classic BF dogfights are generally won or lost within seconds due to the small amout of damage each planes can sustain. But in this two pilots of equal skill can battle it out for up to five minutes thanks to the increased hit points of the planes, each battle usually ends up being quite spectacular eg Zero v Corsair. Of course the main problem is some planes, eg the spitfire just cannot be piloted effectively to compete with the BF109. And one American pacific fighter, I forget its name, the one without a skinned cockpit, it seems to continually bank left. :uhm:




Beast of War

Born to kill

50 XP

28th May 2003

0 Uploads

2,698 Posts

0 Threads

#6 17 years ago
'[KsRSideWinder']Its what I love about FH, in classic BF dogfights are generally won or lost within seconds due to the small amout of damage each planes can sustain. But in this two pilots of equal skill can battle it out for up to five minutes thanks to the increased hit points of the planes, each battle usually ends up being quite spectacular eg Zero v Corsair. Of course the main problem is some planes, eg the spitfire just cannot be piloted effectively to compete with the BF109. And one American pacific fighter, I forget its name, the one without a skinned cockpit, it seems to continually bank left. :uhm:

What are fighters for ?

Fighters need to protect the groundtroops from gettting bombed to hell by enemy bombers. That is what fighters are for.

If they have to chase an enemy fighter that is protecting the enemy bomber for 5 minutes, the enemy bomber is bombing the hell of your own ground troops and they are already dead many times and maybe losing the round because f it before you ever get to knock that bomber out of the air and protect them......that is your job, and facing an enemy bomber protected by an enemy fighter with FH 0.6 aircraft you will fail to do that in time before they kill your ground troops, no matter your skill. Fighters are not for the pleasure of dogfighting....they have a serious job.

In real life fighters explode in 2 seconds when they are actually hit. Watch real WWII guncam footage and see that is true. Fighters are built extremely agile and arobatatic not to be hit.....FH 0.6 is not exactly representing realistic air combat, FH 0.5 was.

The unmanouvereble flight physics and rediculously reduced gundamage was no doubt a gamebalance issue, not a realism issue. Persons like me could dominate a map in a fighter and destroy all targets but ships and tanks in seconds......maybe the devs thought aircraft to be too powerfull and intrusive in ground combat......

I can't figure out why someone would actually like FH 0.6 fighters, other then the slow destruction time they take and the fighter physics preventing skilled pilots from making air combat manouvers allows nOObs to live where they would be dead minutes ago in FH 0.5. It is really like putting a rally car champion in a fiat panda and expect him to perform the same. Wich ofcourse he cannot, because his vehicle is limiting his performance....and that is the same in FH 0.6. Therefor it is really "give a nOOb a chance" flight code then the other way around.




[KsR]SideWinder

Del Monte, I am your father.

50 XP

13th January 2004

0 Uploads

89 Posts

0 Threads

#7 17 years ago

I respect that, but I didn't say all dogfights last 5 minutes, If I see a bomber I will engage it as best I can, on maps like Wake the enemy fighters are to busy strafing the flak guns. I do agree however, damage done by fighters is to low but in classic BF its to high, but thats my opinion.




Beast of War

Born to kill

50 XP

28th May 2003

0 Uploads

2,698 Posts

0 Threads

#8 17 years ago
'[KsRSideWinder']I respect that, but I didn't say all dogfights last 5 minutes, If I see a bomber I will engage it as best I can, on maps like Wake the enemy fighters are to busy strafing the flak guns. I do agree however, damage done by fighters is to low but in classic BF its to high, but thats my opinion.

I guess you never played FH 0.5, that was awesome.....

Fighters fired all guns at once, and unlike bf1942 that could be 8 machineguns or 2 machineguns and 2 cannons. It made other fighters explode in 2 seconds, or even instant. That was realism ! And that surely was more damage then bf1942 fighters did. Skilled pilots could handle that kind of damage, because they were not restricted in manouverebility like they are now......when someone was shooting at them they could execute a sequence of evase air combat manouvers that would make the attacker miss and put them behind their attacker in a few seconds....and then the roles were reversed, often very fatal for those that can only fly circles. I loved that !! Now that is gone....i hope it will return.

In a game where tank damage is highly realistic ( few tanks can resist a Tiger direct hit ) i think you cannot explain unrealistic aircraft damage, however "too powerfull" or "too fast" it might be.




MG42Maniac

A man of dubious moral fibre

50 XP

28th May 2003

0 Uploads

3,932 Posts

0 Threads

#9 17 years ago
Beast of WarI guess you never played FH 0.5, that was awesome..... Fighters fired all guns at once, and unlike bf1942 that could be 8 machineguns or 2 machineguns and 2 cannons. It made other fighters explode in 2 seconds, or even instant. That was realism ! And that surely was more damage then bf1942 fighters did. Skilled pilots could handle that kind of damage, because they were not restricted in manouverebility like they are now......when someone was shooting at them they could execute a sequence of evase air combat manouvers that would make the attacker miss and put them behind their attacker in a few seconds....and then the roles were reversed, often very fatal for those that can only fly circles. I loved that !! Now that is gone....i hope it will return. In a game where tank damage is highly realistic ( few tanks can resist a Tiger direct hit ) i think you cannot explain unrealistic aircraft damage, however "too powerfull" or "too fast" it might be.

Where they that powerful? I can remember the FW 190 having uber guns but I can't recall the rest of the planes having uber guns but then it is ages since I have played 0.5. I actually like the vanilla damage system, you get some bullets into the engine and it goes down really really fast, the bullets actually go where the cross-hairs are :eek: and the flight physics were about right for the size of maps and the limitations of the engine. 0.5 was a step in the right direction in terms of phyiscs but 0.6 was 20 steps backwards.




Froggin_Ashole42

My nationality? I'm a mut.

50 XP

4th March 2004

0 Uploads

530 Posts

0 Threads

#10 17 years ago

Speaking of dogfighting, I think whenever a gun hits a plane, it should make a big spark like it does in IL2 FB.