WWI: Straight question for the staff.

[BnZs]

Are there going to be any new planes added and/or modifications to existing flight models or changes to the arena itself any time in the foreseeable future?

[CptTrips]

Prepare for all the "Two Weeks" tard replies and their varients.
 


Wab

[CptTrips]

Are there going to be any new planes added and/or modifications to existing flight models or changes to the arena itself any time in the foreseeable future?

I would like to know the same.  However, I would exclude player-made maps.  We already know Ranger is making a map.  I would like to know, what past that, are their plans. If any.

Wab

[Yeager]

I wish I had the aerodynamic engineering credentials to say the DR1 torque modeling is moderately overstated (wrong) but I do not.  So I have to live with it.  Or do I?....actually no.  that is why I don't visit there anymore.  I can say here with confidence that my own personal needs for the suspension of disbelief when I fly in a flight simulator are simply raked over the coals when I fight in and against DR1s.
Having said that: an SE5a and Albatross would go a LONG WAYs towards bringing me back into the WW1 game.  Just hate that little triplane devil 

[Zoney]

I wish I had the aerodynamic engineering credentials to say the DR1 torque modeling is moderately overstated (wrong) but I do not.  So I have to live with it.  Or do I?....actually no.  that is why I don't visit there anymore.  I can say here with confidence that my own personal needs for the suspension of disbelief when I fly in a flight simulator are simply raked over the coals when I fight in and against DR1s.
Having said that: an SE5a and Albatross would go a LONG WAYs towards bringing me back into the WW1 game.  Just hate that little triplane devil 

I gotta agree with Yeager here in that the use of the DR1 is an arena killer for me.  I do go in there every-once-in-a-while and grab a Dr7 but if I encounter mostly DR1's then I'm out.  I suppose I could fly the DR1 but frankly, I don't like it.

[Melvin]

I gotta agree with Yeager here in that the use of the DR1 is an arena killer for me.  I do go in there every-once-in-a-while and grab a Dr7 but if I encounter mostly DR1's then I'm out.  I suppose I could fly the DR1 but frankly, I don't like it.

+1, except I'm partial to the F-1.

[BnZs]

I see nothing wrong with the Triplane, aside from the fact that it is made of adamantium. And I know that cannot be historically accurate, because I've read the comic where Logan went into a berserker rage and slashed a whole Jasta of Dr1s to bits with his claws...

Seriously, the maneuver edge, I take it in stride, the little thing was a maneuverable lift monster. And I find the Camel *almost* as good a Turner Yeager. But the ability to absolutely absorb tons of ammo and to pull black-out G maneuvers more appropriate to WWII airplanes...nah. Don't buy it for a minute.

And don't forget the Spad. It would be flat-out fast, diving, bnz fighter in the WWI arena. Perhaps that would be annoying at times, yet it would also draw users.

Now, back to my question...

I wish I had the aerodynamic engineering credentials to say the DR1 torque modeling is moderately overstated (wrong) but I do not.  So I have to live with it.  Or do I?....actually no.  that is why I don't visit there anymore.  I can say here with confidence that my own personal needs for the suspension of disbelief when I fly in a flight simulator are simply raked over the coals when I fight in and against DR1s.
Having said that: an SE5a and Albatross would go a LONG WAYs towards bringing me back into the WW1 game.  Just hate that little triplane devil  

[USRanger]

I would like to know the same.  However, I would exclude player-made maps.  We already know Ranger is making a map.  I would like to know, what past that, are their plans. If any.

Wab

Submitted it over a week ago.  Waiting on Skuzzy to put it into play.

[Reaper90]

Seriously, the maneuver edge, I take it in stride, the little thing was a maneuverable lift monster. And I find the Camel *almost* as good a Turner Yeager. But the ability to absolutely absorb tons of ammo and to pull black-out G maneuvers more appropriate to WWII airplanes...nah. Don't buy it for a minute.

That and it's about 10 mph too fast...

[CptTrips]

Personally, while I defer to others on the historical modelling of the DR.I, I think balance-wise the main problem with the DR.I is the completely one dimensional game-play that centers, and is limited to, exactly the DR.I’s most advantageous envelope.  The one mission profile available is exactly where the DR. I excels.  So with-in that context, it will enjoy an unbalancing advantage.

Start adding other mission profiles (e.g. 15k Gotha bomber runs to destroy field and strategic resources, Fast moving SPAD XIII attacks on observation balloons, Zeplins at 20k, etc) and you would start to provide other contexts in which the DR.I might not dominate.  It will still dominate its part of the arena ecosystem, but there will be other areas and mission available where the DR.I might not be the best plane to choose.  That will start to add variety.

As long as there is only one mission profile available, and it’s the one dogfight available on the map, between the only 2 fields that get used, between the same 2 countries, and at the same alt it always is,  then it will remain a mostly DR.I arena, most of the time (when anyone is actually in there).

Regards,
Wab

[Yeager]

I see nothing wrong with the Triplane

I really wish I could say the same.  The gyro effect on the DR1 allows it to maneuver in ways that simply defy virtual gravity, in my minds eye.  Whether I am right or wrong can be argued and no doubt eventually proven, but if it kills my sense of believability then I cannot participate.  From the numbers we see in the WW1 arena these past few months (zero to four at any given time, more often than not -zero) I cannot be the only one who feels the force, or lack of it.

[BnZs]

The Dr1 is only utterly dominant when you must do a few dozen sustained 360 degree turns with it. Often the fight would not last that long if the triplane were not made of admantium.

Its other major disadvantage is ridiculous Gs it can pull. Being able to pull black-out Gs at speed is a huge cornering advantage when fighting planes that are substantially more G limited and I have been shown 0, none, nada, nill evidence that a Dr1 was tougher in this regard than a Camel or a DVII.

Personally, while I defer to others on the historical modelling of the DR.I, I think balance-wise the main problem with the DR.I is the completely one dimensional game-play that centers, and is limited to, exactly the DR.I’s most advantageous envelope.  The one mission profile available is exactly where the DR. I excels.  So with-in that context, it will enjoy an unbalancing advantage.

Start adding other mission profiles (e.g. 15k Gotha bomber runs to destroy field and strategic resources, Fast moving SPAD XIII attacks on observation balloons, Zeplins at 20k, etc) and you would start to provide other contexts in which the DR.I might not dominate.  It will still dominate its part of the arena ecosystem, but there will be other areas and mission available where the DR.I might not be the best plane to choose.  That will start to add variety.

As long as there is only one mission profile available, and it’s the one dogfight available on the map, between the only 2 fields that get used, between the same 2 countries, and at the same alt it always is,  then it will remain a mostly DR.I arena, most of the time (when anyone is actually in there).

Regards,
Wab

[BnZs]

Hmmmph...gyroscopic effects are part of combat, and frankly the Camel with its even greater instability in yaw can do even more exotic things.

[Reaper90]

Give us the SE5a.........

[FLS]

[quote author=BnZs link=topic=308898.msg3989822#msg3989822 date=1300291505

Its other major disadvantage is ridiculous Gs it can pull. Being able to pull black-out Gs at speed is a huge cornering advantage when fighting planes that are substantially more G limited and I have been shown 0, none, nada, nill evidence that a Dr1 was tougher in this regard than a Camel or a DVII.

[/quote]

The Dr1 wing design was so strong that it didn't need struts and wire bracing. The struts that were added to the original design were not necessary and were added simply to reassure the pilots who were uncomfortable seeing the wings flex. The top wing failures that occurred were reportedly manufacturing defects not design defects.  

Have we seen any evidence that the Dr1 couldn't handle more G loading than the Camel or DVII ?