Weaknesses of Red Baron 3D Flight Model?

[sightreader]

Howdy all!

Well, the only sim I ever really got good at was Red Baron II (also Red Baron 3D). I mostly flew the Alb DVa in the "advanced" flight model: I noticed that, after a while, all servers went with the "normal" flight model instead.

What sorts of bad habits might I have picked up from that sim? Obviously I've learned quite a few, as my skills do not transfer well to a game like IL2. How is energy management different in RB3D "advanced" FM and reality?

Thanks for any ideas you might have!

[sightreader]

Yay! Another game designer! (cheers)

Originally Posted by dglewwe

your post regarding bad habits picked up from sim-gaming prompted this note --i didn't think it rated a public posting, so chose to use the PM feature.

Hey, I happen to think this is a great topic... please forgive me for posting this, but I think you bring up some very important issues that need wider discussion. Don't worry about having strong opinions: it just means you love it dearly. As long as you're respectful, you'll always be fine in my book!

Originally Posted by dglewwe

the biggest problem with sim experience, to me, is that it is sim experience. i don't want to come across as huffy/snobby, but i truly believe that (as far as non-instrument, open-cockpit flying goes) sim experience is to real flying expereince as dryer lint is to sex: anyone who says they are in the least the same either hasn't done the latter...or if they did, it was a truly sad example of it!

Yes, I can only claim one passenger experience in an open cockpit aircraft. My bad back and 6'5 height make any flight experience beyond that problematic. Sigh.

Originally Posted by dglewwe

i make this point because, to me at least, most game designs get stuck on the dry, technical aspects of flying

I certainly agree! I certainly don't want to have a "wargame" experience where people spend their entire day consulting charts and rolling dice... ugh!

I even think flight sims are too complicated. I think beginners get bogged down trying to find the key that will retract their flaps, trying to figure out which way they are looking, trying to figure out what that beeping sound is, and so forth. Thus, many folks get frustrated and figure they're wasting all this effort on what will ultimately be just another 3D frag fest. The beginner is caught in a Catch-22: to justify all the work, they want to see what it's like, but to see what it's like, they have to do all the work.

My game seeks to break that impasse by handling all the gruesome details of flying for them and allow them to concentrate on air combat strategy itself.

Originally Posted by dglewwe

i am recommending that you take a step back and think about what you want the player/pilots to feel when playing the game and what sort of decisions should be occupying their energies.

I completely agree! My approach is to have all these arcane technical aspects of flying work themselves out, leaving players free to fly and fight. My top priority is to preserve that reactive "zoom! zoom! zoom!" nature of a dogfight. I seek to make a game that plays as fast as a kid's game, where all those complicated calculations affect the outcome but don't require any effort on the gamer's part!

[sightreader]

Originally Posted by sightreader

What sorts of bad habits might I have picked up from that sim?

I noticed that, diving on a lower fighter in RB 3D, I would be able to zoom back up out of reach, climb around for a bit, and try again. However, in IL2, this no longer worked, as the degradation in altitude increased drastically with each pass no matter how careful I was to be gentle on the controls and minimize G's. Generally, after 2 passes, my target could get enough shots at me that I would be forced to evade and any altitude advantage could be negated.

I assume IL2 is the more realistic. Would this then mean that you couldn't do more than 1 or 2 passes with a boom and zoom plane, after which you'd need your speed just to get out of there?

Thanks for your input!

[Polovski]

IL2 you need to learn to fight in the vertical almost completely in an evenly matched set of a/c rather than dive a little and climb a little. WW1 I think is more unique in that the planes had sometimes widely differing quirks to use as advantage and disadvantage with much less power and climbing speed.

[sightreader]

Originally Posted by Polovski

IL2 you need to learn to fight in the vertical almost completely in an evenly matched set of a/c rather than dive a little and climb a little.

Can you clarify what you mean by this? By "dive a little" and "climb a little", are you indicating a 2 dimensional fight with some minor adjustments in altitude? By fighting in the vertical, are you referring to manuvers such as the rolling scissors?

Originally Posted by sightreader

Howdy all!

Well, the only sim I ever really got good at was Red Baron II (also Red Baron 3D). I mostly flew the Alb DVa in the "advanced" flight model: I noticed that, after a while, all servers went with the "normal" flight model instead.

What sorts of bad habits might I have picked up from that sim? Obviously I've learned quite a few, as my skills do not transfer well to a game like IL2. How is energy management different in RB3D "advanced" FM and reality?

Thanks for any ideas you might have!

..... Oh boy! I can't recall all the details, but a tremendous amount of digital ink was spilled on the old Delphi Red Baron Forum over the stark unrealities of RB3D's "advanced" FM - the D.III was a spaceship in "advanced" FM, the Camel flew better after losing its upper wing - that sort of stuff. Reversion to the "normal" FM for MM (massive-multiplayer) online play was pretty much a unanimous decision.

[GabiLaser]

Originally Posted by Byron

..... Oh boy! I can't recall all the details, but a tremendous amount of digital ink was spilled on the old Delphi Red Baron Forum over the stark unrealities of RB3D's "advanced" FM - the D.III was a spaceship in "advanced" FM, the Camel flew better after losing its upper wing - that sort of stuff. Reversion to the "normal" FM for MM (massive-multiplayer) online play was pretty much a unanimous decision.

After that, Rens came and fixed those ubering issues, good FMs appeared (e.g Greybeard's used now often in Single Player), ... and players inertia kept them to flying NFM online (and the fact that they knew it well).

[sightreader]

Originally Posted by GabiLaser

After that, Rens came and fixed those ubering issues, good FMs appeared (e.g Greybeard's used now often in Single Player), ... and players inertia kept them to flying NFM online (and the fact that they knew it well).

So no one ever fixed the Advanced FM?

[GabiLaser]

Originally Posted by sightreader

So no one ever fixed the Advanced FM?

There are a number of flight events based on modified AFMs. For example, 'Flanders in Flames' and 'Cold War':

Flanders in Flames 2

RB3D The cold war intern

If you are interested, a common meeting point for many of the RB multiplayers is this forum:

Wings of Valor

S! Gabi/Laser

[totoroman]

Originally Posted by sightreader

So no one ever fixed the Advanced FM?

if you mean "fixed" the standard Sierra-issued "out of the box" AFM, then no. that never really got fixed. it simply got replaced by more historically accurate and/or playable flight and damage models.

the Uber affect is a mixture of flight and damage model files. and there are at least two or three flight models that have resolved the "Uber" super-powered damaged aircraft.

with the most recent Greybeard and WvW flight-models it's actually pretty similar, in over all play experience, to what we now see in "Over Flanders Fields"--in some ways it's not quite as good, but more importantly it can be played on a larger variety of low-end and older machines.

the Flanders in Flames online experience is definitely one of the best flight-sim experiences I've ever had. the early war match-ups are especially exciting, because if you don't conserve your energy and play it smart you'll die in a hurry. RB3d has come a long, LONG way since it's early years.