OK, call me a heretic and ban me!

[ndicki]

I've lost interest in CFS3 for a number of reasons, but one of them is going to horrify you - the degree of realism.

It may be too realistic.

Shocked?

I simply find that since the introduction of 4.00 flight dynamics, I'm not enjoying myself any more. Can you fly the D.520, for example? It doesn't fly for me, it stalls. Now I'm sure there are some accomplished pilots out there who can get it to work wonders, but I'm not one of them. I don't have time to train that well, so when I do fire up CFS3 and go out to face the Hun, I want to be able to have a reasonable compromise between realistic performance and flyability. Since the introduction of 4.00 flight dynamics, I actually cannot fly half the aircraft I have in my stable. That beautiful Bf109e is another one. Straight into the deck, every time. I've fitted the old 2.XX flight dynamics to my MS.406s, just to have some chance of killing somebody else before I get killed myself.

Don't misunderstand me - I think the AvHistory team has done a fabulous, dedicated job, and if you're good enough, you'll be able to get the very best flying experience possible from their aircraft. That is the point.

But I for one am not up to it, don't have the time, and am finding the whole CFS3 experience less fruitful for my own enjoyment as a result. So I do other things instead.

Am I the only one? If I'm not, how about someone doing us a set of 2.XX or similar FMs for use with the MAW/W40/ETO aircraft that are the most challenging to fly? The ones which I have the most trouble with are the Bf109e and D.520.

Well?

[Wyld45]

No worrys mate,it happens from time to time. Just give it an ol'rest for awhile and pull out some of them other favorites for a bit. I didnt think I would get into as deep as I have,since before putting it back on the second time. After I first got it,I hadnt discovered all the wonderful add-ons and all the splendid Gents on this fantastic forum and was still playing "Aces High II". They had some really great aircraft and the characteristics were top notch. The cockpits were very detailed and sweet to look at,I just didnt like the Knights vs Rooks vs Bishops play. After falling down the internet hole,ended up here ,and seeing one of many pretty aircraft that said,"Fly Me", that was all it took.

I left Aces High II for all this and still enjoy it.I put it aside once in awhile so I can play BF1942,Silent HunterIII,Day of Defeat and several others for my WWII sim enjoyment. Stick around ndicki,you'll get an itch again even if the characteristics desire more realism.

[Led Zeppelin]

I've got the same problem with following aircrafts:

Hurricane
MC200
MC202

I don't have any troubles with the Emil.



By the way ndicki, if you've lost interest in CFS3, will you release some of your work that is taking dust on your HD? I particullary think about the Battle skins!

[ndicki]

Hi Loic - funnily enough, the Hurri flies easily. You tell me...

I must finish those skins, you're right. It won't take much to get them ready for issue.

[Nonato]

Guys

If I may say something.
Realism is sometimes the great enemy (to be beaten).

I experienced this with the high altitude escort missions flying P-47B or C's. Even the Mustang got me sometimes a lot of headaches to fly in the same type of missions.

But maybe I am the type of guy that would not survive a real tour of service in WWII (or any other war)...maybe that's the way I am, that's all.

Or maybe the lack of realism is the problem!!! How? Well let's talk a bit about the undestructible Fw190 spawns whose single machine gun burst can torn my plane into pieces but are completely resistant to my fire. Or even those spawn pilots that have no black/red veil when making turns while I stay virtually blind enclosed in my canopy...

But I agree with Loic that the Hurri is sometimes a b***h to fly!

Cheers

Nonato

[Pat Pattle]

Hi Nigel,

Please release anything you have lurking about your hard drive! Battle skins would be especially welcome.

The fm's are a tricky issue. I've been flying in the 109E as well and find it a real handful - Having said that the 109 has become a bit of a challenge and I'm determined to master the little b*gger - the Hurri on the other hand is great. Perhaps a lot of it is down to our own interest and enthusiasm getting into the mix somehow??

The main thing IMO is that the performance of each a/c relative to it's opponents is as realistic as possible, not necessarily the fm itself, if that makes sense.

Happy christmas!

[flashgordon]

We all need to refresh our taste buds occasionally but keep an eye on this forum as 2010 looks to be a vintage year for CFS3 with many new long awaited a/c and addons in the pipeline. These hopefully will get those juices flowing again to the extent that you will be tempted to pick up that paintbrush to give us some more fantastic skins.

[loverboy1]

i speak for myself ,,,i feel what you feel is a simple case of fatigue .based on either trying to hard to shoot something down or as simple as a rest is in order .


the realism is solid and growing , in a way that follows technology . and how the sim platform adapts to the era of its time .

developers and makers of missions in here , are exact with touches of flavour to keep the realism and the time up to date and the excitment fo flight for us

the air files are of high standard , and the dynamics alike. if you look at fsx upgrades and all,,,i think the answer comes swiftly off the wings of flight they do as well .


ETO , boys are no small band of rouge has beens. they are an eltie growing squad of techie wizards . for our soul enjoyment - of simmers flight and realism as best they can on missions . keep the memory and meaning alive /

its really a glory to be flying missions withn added touches fo excitment knowing in the past it was.

sounds envirom,ent and flight handling can be heavy on heart but the splendor of these addons leaves one wanting , asking and needing more .


so i feel youve got a case of battle fatigue . cure is simple ......


Baths, Electricity and massage. Rest of mind and body is essential in all cases.

AND FINALLY ....

********** old bottle of scotch *****************


JOSHUA /LOVERBOY1

[NachtPiloten]

Ah, what is it? I doubt there is anyone flying in CFS3 that flew in the 1940's let alone one of these crude war planes. So how they fly, in the game is subjective to a large degree. The AVh approach to fm's is one way to look at the developing fms. Greg can make a model and then lets say I could and the planes will be very different (Mine are better of course ). You go to other games and they use different algorithms to model flight. There is a big rift in philosophy. X Plane is supposedly certfied for certan types of pilot training. It uses one way to model flight. Some say it is inferior and lacking. Well who knows I guess. The guys flying FSX and its brethren maybe best equipped to critique a model since many of what they fly are up and about today.

Sorry to see you go ndicki, but you'll be back.....

[ndicki]

People seem to be missing my point - I'm not criticising the way in which the FMs are developed, far from it. I have the greatest respect for the AvHistory team, as they well know, and I believe that as far as it is possible, they are doing everything they can to give us the most realistic FMs that CFS3 can take.

My problem is that I can't fly them for toffee, and I don't expect I'm the only one. The old 2.XX were apparently less realistic, I know, but I could fly them reasonably well, that's my point. I am not attempting to define realism or rewrite the AvHistory charter - which I do agree with in most respects.


Edit - I've got a lovely Yugoslav Bf109E-3 that didn't get into MAW, and I've fitted it with an old 2.XX FM from the early days of MAW, and I'm having great fun with it. Just shot down 2 German 109Es. As long as one enjoys oneself...!

[Henry]

Ho! Ho! Ho!
this debate has gone on for years
its one of the hardest things,
what AVH has done is uniform all planes to make things fair
across the board, to me thats a great thing
now fun is a different thing thats how we personally see things
maybe a Mossie does not feel right to me
its not the way i perceive it to be or handle
so i change mine thats not good for online
it opens the door for unfair flying
its all about perception.
Ndicki
whatever you do have fun and hang around here
H

[ndicki]

Henry, you've just cheered me up no end! And your point about uniformisation is well made. Before they came along, it was all based on "I think it flew like this," based on nothing more scientific than wishful thinking. That was obviously not an option, despite its being the MS philosophy of flight...

But I liked the old 2.00 ones - they were a good compromise between accuracy and playability.

[Henry]

But I liked the old 2.00 ones - they were a good compromise between accuracy and playability.

to me that is what its all about
if i cannot fly one i dont hence no fun
H

[greycap.raf]

The big problem isn't so much that you can't fly them to the absolute limits, it's that the AI can - and with much lighter aircraft at that. If your opponents were prone to errors like humans are and their aircraft were loaded with a ton of fuel you'd probably find fighting a lot easier as you wouldn't have to extract 110% just to stay with them, let alone shoot them down.

They're more fun to fly for me than 2.8x but that indeed means flying for my own joy. And fun is what matters... which has led to me doing my own share of fiddling, including home made versions out of existing aircraft (4.00 series Spitfire I-II-V-IX being the main examples) and half assed attempts to simulate 150 grade fuel. 100% realistic? No. Better than what I had before? Most definitely.

[flyer01]

I would have to say the pilots that flue the planes of WWI and WWII tweaked them to the planes ability and to the pilots liking.
As WWII went on the horsepower increased and the pilots would report the changes in the handling of the planes and the ground crews would make the changes in the planes. So to pin point the best flight dynamics of a plane would be very difficult. In the sim world you may have a plane that has the flight dynamics for less H.P. with a plane ment to have more H.P. and so on.

flyer01

[exc141ac]

I like when we get a new SOH member and they post the "P-51" is a dog issue.
If you don't keep the fuel load to around 50 percent -- it is.
Happens every time.

[Animal]

I'm with ndicki on this one. I actually prefered the older fm models compared to (some) of the newer 4.00 Fm models. The bf109 in paticular is a pain pulls to the left(?) far too much for my liking. If this is realistic that's fine, but for a flight sim, it strips away a bit of the fun. Just my opinion. Maybe a comprimise of some sort can be reached?:salute:

[flyer01]

I like when we get a new SOH member and they post the "P-51" is a dog issue.
If you don't keep the fuel load to around 50 percent -- it is.
Happens every time.

The P-51 was used on long range bomber missions. To keep the fuel at 50% was not realistic. So yes the air file could not have be right in the out of the box CFS3. Fact is the British planes where favored over the USA planes in the out of the box CFS3. Just as the fighter plane was favored over the gunner in the bombers which was not realistic.
That is the great thing about CFS3 you can if you know how fix things to be more realistic.
What I'm saying is there are planes in the out of the box CFS3 that would have never seen combat.

flyer01

[HouseHobbit]

I gress I would Like to say, I don't have a problem with ANY plane.. WHAT He Said!!
None of any of the aircraft are perfect.. But I don't require Perfect..
There are Great Aircraft, and there are less then Great aircraft..But for me, any aircraft is better then None..
I am Very grateful to all who work to enrich our flight simming..And even is a Aircraft is not Perfect, I have always been Grateful..And conidering, I once flew little aircraft whicn were funny shaped Lines with a 800 XL computer in the early 80's and had fun.. What we have now is WONDERFUL to me..No I don't expect all to be perfect, JUST FUN..
Ok, hang me on a Cross for this.. But no matter what I shall not scream too loudly if My Mustang is not as a real P51 is.. Because I do remember when My aircraft were just lines on a TV screen..
And now we have such Wonderful aircraft from many dedicated and talented people to play with..
Thanks to ALL for their efforts perfect or not I am very pleased to tangle and dogfight with them..
And I will add, This CFS family of sims has been a many year process, that only seems to get better with the Efforts of Many people..To All Thank You..
:salute:

[hairyspin]

I've caused enough trouble with FMs lately, so I won't comment. But I hope you haven't given up completely on skinning! And I wish AvH hadn't given up on CFS3 flight modelling...

Merry Christmas to you when it comes, Nigel!

[ndicki]

Cheers, Tom! You too! :ernae:

No, I'm not criticising, merely stating my own inability to do much with certain aircraft...

I've got a few skins to hand, mainly for the Fairey Battle, but I need to be very careful; last time I got into any serious painting, the nerves in my right arm and neck went funny. I got the opportunity to find out all about waiting lists in French hospitals. A year it took to get all the tests done, and then they said they couldn't fix it anyway. They don't tell you about that side of the French NHS on the BBC!

[BEAR - AvHistory]

I'm with ndicki on this one. I actually prefered the older fm models compared to (some) of the newer 4.00 Fm models. The bf109 in paticular is a pain pulls to the left(?) far too much for my liking. If this is realistic that's fine, but for a flight sim, it strips away a bit of the fun. Just my opinion. Maybe a comprimise of some sort can be reached?:salute:

Thats why Luftwaffe pilots all had pain over London & big right legs. No in-flight trim for the rudder. :d The tab had to be manually set in one posistion by the mechanic & if it did not suit the aircrafts speed you were out of luck.

[ndicki]

LoL! It is true! And the 4.00 Bf109e does it to perfection! And then (with me at the controls) spins out of control the moment I do anything more than try to keep it in a straight line... This is more about my flying abilities than Gregory's FMs, I think...

[lewis11777]

Nigel CFS3 won't be the same without you so please tell me which FM you don't like and I will send you my version. I feel your pain as I have always had issues with CFS3 FM's both stock and avhist. I think the avhist guys do a fantastic job of getting the technical flight data correct in each and every FM. However that doesn't necessarily translate to 100% accuracy considering the limitations of CFS3.

In my experience both stock and some avhist planes respond to control inputs in an unatural manner. I never climbed into a WWII fighter but I have logged PIC time in various fixed wing aircraft, high wing, low wing, tricycle gear, tail dragger, float plane, fixed gear and retractable gear. Each aircraft has its unique traits but some things are characteristic to all aircraft.

Some of the CFS3 aircraft will instantly stall with a sharp backward tug on the yoke and that is starting from a straight and level position with plenty of airspeed. Some of these snap roll way too easily. If some of these more extreme cases were accurate there would have been a lot more dead pilots in the training phase of WWII.

[Donnybrooke]

LoL! It is true! And the 4.00 Bf109e does it to perfection! And then (with me at the controls) spins out of control the moment I do anything more than try to keep it in a straight line... This is more about my flying abilities than Gregory's FMs, I think...

Ndicki,

Well, it may be more about your computer than the FMs. I actually proved this once to a friend when he said that the FM of one aircraft was totally porked, so I let him try it on my system and he was completely surprised! It was an entirely different aircraft he told me. (This was a different game and is used only as an example).

It would be nice if we all had the same computer, interface, programs, hard drives, operating systems, joysticks, coffee mugs, etc. to play games on (and no, I'm not pushing for consoles), but we don't. This isn't the fault of the people who make the FMs, or the game manufacturers, or your system (entirely). It's just a minor wiggle in the nature of the beast.

You can hear pilot's stories about the behavior of a certain type of aircraft, and then you hear about how one of these (of the same make and model) performed like a dog, while the other is a kitten. Think how much more varied are the components of a computer!

So maybe you should just push your commanding officer for a different aircraft (computer)? A good mechanic is sometimes all it takes!