Please keep the realism!
 

With news in the beta patch thread that the Spitfire cut out has been changed from real values,and mechanical guages have been made electric because players don't like the way they move I think going down this road would be a mistake.
CoD is shaping up to be the best WW2 flight sim ever,and it would be a real shame to introduce unrealistic elements into the game just because some people are confused.

Definately agree.

+1

Agree PLease dont dumb it down

S!

+1. Realism above all.

+1

As a realism squad - most definitely +1!

I think the same!!!

+1 No compromise !

+1

at least make it an option like "realistic instruments" for real compass and gauge behaviour.

seconding that as well.

Except, as always (ceterum censero... :rolleyes: ) some heading indicator for those without 6DOF, as they have no well-working way to find out the heading ^_^

I fully agree, realism all the way, we are simmers not just gamers.

~S~

Agreed. This simulator wants to exceed IL-2 1946 and therefor should not compromise on these vital matters.

I agree. The user always are afraid of changes, but that's what keep us moving.

+10

+1

This is not a console game...

+1. CloD is greater realism; keep it real Devs!

+1 here. I don't want to see anything dumbed down by default. Lets keep it as accurate as possible!

Maybe a realism option similiar to engine management? Real instruments vs simple.

+1

keep the realism!

I loved my bouncy gauges and want them back! :D

+1

+1 for realism

Agree.
no need to change something because some players "feel" it's not right.
This is a SIMULATION, the only way something should be changed is if there is reliable data on the subject. If you have data that shows the merlin cuts with 0.5 G, then keep it that way unless more reliable/detailed data is found or provided by someone.

+1 for realism

+1 if that's the way it was, let's have it like that (although I wouldn't mind if it was toned down a little, purely because real dials are easier to read than the small versions we see on our monitor) - if some need the option not to have it, let it be a realism setting.

yup

+1 for realism

+1

+1

+1

+1 I agree.

...but, think about this - Luthier has maybe played a nice move here - the beta patch will be in effect for all of 3 days, then will be superseded. He has made some changes that can easily be undone very quickly while at the same time letting some of the people who were unhappy see the downside of going for changes they were asking for. :)

+1

Keep it real...that's the point.

Keep it real, or preferably make it a difficulty option.

+1000
realism is a must have for this game....sorry is supposed to be a sim isnt it?

+1
thought the same when I read the patchnotes:(

Keep it as close to 1940 as possible!
 

Please, please, please:

Keep it as close to 1940 as possible!

RedToo.

Well, the tacho movement was overdone (It's not a pressure-dependant instrument after all), so I guess this one should be reworked. The other instruments? Maybe, I'm not qualified enough to say, however...

Giving the choice is usually the best solution. Make shaky instruments one of difficulty options and all users are happy to choose what's comfortable for them.

This has been discussed on the FM forum in quite a bit of detail and it was clear the engines on the British aircraft were cutting out for long periods, which is inaccurate. By all the reports of actual pilots and the facts re. carburetor float bowl characteristics, the cutout would not come nearly as quickly in real life as the game had originally portrayed, nor would it persist as long.

Quote from an actual pilot:

"I have the privilege of flying and displaying Hurricane Mk1, [serial deleted]. It will not surprise you to know that in deference to it's age and historical importance we do not fly the aircraft as aggressively as it would have been flown during combat. Particularly, we avoid negative g so I am not well placed to answer your question specifically. However, I can give you some clues.

First, I can tell you that it does not require negative g to make the engine suffer from a shortage of fuel supply; a significant reduction of g down to, say, 0.3g can be enough to make the engine misfire. This can be experienced towards the top of a wing-over but I would estimate that the reduction in g needs to be maintained for 2 seconds or more before there are any effects. Undoubtedly, if the reduction in g was greater (to less than zero g) and particularly if the bunt was abrupt then the effect could be instantaneous. I have never, though, experienced any misfiring in turbulence; albeit, were the turbulence severe enough to produce g spikes to less than zero g, I would not rule out the possibility of the odd cough from the engine. Of interest to you I am sure is that on recovery from an episode of fuel starvation the engine recovers through a short period of over-richness shown by, I would estimate, up to a second of black, sooty exhaust before normal combustion is resumed.

Good luck with your simulation."


This is a change will provide a more accurate reflection of the real aircraft.

+1

+1 was a little suprised when i read the patch notes, W.O.P is that way ->

+1

http://images.fanpop.com/images/imag...75_355_475.jpg

KEEP IT REAL :):)

+1
no compromise, we want realism!

At least make a option for the changes u made!!
Thank you for the great sim!

+1 for this petition!

Signed by Me ;)

+1

I'm the only one that was having fun with the carburetors planes behavior ? I was very happy with this new step in realism.

I was having really fun flying the Spitfire and the Hurricane, learning to keep my G on the engine on loops and turns.

This just kill my fun right now.

This change should be optional in the Disable Realism Options, not forced to all.

Please keep the carburetors engines behavior available to those who want a full simulation.

Dumbed down - no way! This happened to Il-2 and I do hope that CloD will not go down that route.

Corrected - absolutely.

The positive G cutout (which should have been a -ve G cutout) was IMO, with a bit of knowledge about engines and after reading the lengthy discussions, overdone.

Making an RPM gauge which did not bounce around was not above the capabilities of 1930s technology.

Definitely in the realm of corrections, still.

+1,000,000,000.

Yes, please don't listen to players if you are certain it's historically correct.
And if it's absolutely necessary add it as a realism option..

This makes me question the other parts of the game, have there been other compromises on historical accuracy to make some things more comfortable to certain players?

I completely agree.

Also for those who don't like cut outs: use the "No Complex Engine Management" if you don't like it (and I am a Spit flyer)

Anyhow I think the problem with the cut out are not the values that are fine but probably there was expected to be a more inert behaviour from 1g to 0.25g than right now. That is what probably caused some trouble

or
perhaps and more likely it was only because the feedback coming from the game (sound, smoke) was too strong so it felt as if the cut out was overmodelled (I highly believe that it was just a too strong audio and video feedback than really a problem of FM).

+1

1+ Keep it real as it gets

+1 Please keep game as real as possible)

If how the gauges and cut-outs were as presented originally is how they were in real life... please put them back, or at least have the an option in the Realism section

i'm with you mate:-P

Can't say I've ever flown a plane, let alone a Spitfire. But I have to agree with people here. The neg G thing has been tweaked too far.

Like anything, practice and you'll improve. Seem's to be no choke point now and just cut-out. Doesn't feel the same, and the Spit has lost character for me.

Not too fussed about how needles move on dials, as long as they are generally giving a correct reading.

But, change the characteristics of the Spit back!

I'm quite sure that we'll end up with a realistic sim because that's what the majority of the vocal section of the community wants (obviously there are probably quite a lot of people who have bought the sim but don't post and so nobody really knows what they want...).

Provided that people keep posting data, which they will, the chances are that things will progressively get fixed over time.

OTOH, I suspect that quite a lot of what's going on at the moment is about quick, pragmatic fixes rather than for example trying to get the perfect tachometer in one go.

I would imagine that switching the tacho type to electric is just a quicker way of reducing bounce than rewriting the mechanical tacho code.

I would also point out that stuff like instrument behaviour is very technical and quite specific. AFAIK some of the compass parameters we have are currently taken from Russian compasses of the period, presumably because it's easier to get a WWII Russian compass in Russia than to get a WWII British or German compass.

It's therefore quite possible that the mechanical tacho model might be based on Russian instruments of the period rather than British ones, resulting in different behaviour despite the fact that the mode of operation is nominally the same. So we might get more realistic instrument behaviour post-patch, even if the drive mechanism is wrong (which I suppose might impact the DM).

As for the carburettor stuff, it's complicated, as the 10 page thread on the subject attests. I suspect that again, the behaviour mentioned in the beta patch readme is a pragmatic quick fix rather than the last word on the subject.

So at this point I'm probably more relaxed than the average person here; I'm in this for the long haul, and view the next few months as more of a large scale public beta than anything else. We'll get there in the end. :)

+1 .........carefull what you wish for in the future eh.

+1 for Realism.

Reading the patch notes I was happy to see improvements in the performance of the game, but sad to see adjustments to realism because some people 'don't like how it looks'.

If a Spitfire cuts out at .25G in real life, then it should cut out at .25G in this sim.

End of.

+1

Please don't lower the realism in game, at the very least make it switchable in case it really has to be added for those who are "confused"

Real is better!!!

I want to fly antiques, NOT Jet planes.

Can we have these back please! Who cares what people "expect" this is a sim! Expect realism!

Especially the carburetter option. There's a nice little vid on this thread that shows just how touchy the Rolls Royce engine is.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=20462

If it's already going toward less realism because some people can't handle the game, then what will it be when people feel that they can't kill enough tiger tanks with the .50 cal...?

+1 for realism because it's not MS combat flight simulator!

+1

+1

I too vote for keeping realism! :grin:

...as real as it has been back then ;)

Another vote for realism. Make it optional, but keep the real thing in the game.

+1

From reading posts from expierenced RL pilots I get the impresion that the bouncing instruments were not realistic and were overdone like you say. So maybe you are gaining realism not losing it this way. I expect the devs will work on the mechanical instuments to make them more realistic and then reinstate them in a later patch.

Way to over react Luthier, LOL.

At worst the Hurri may have needed some fine tweaking but in no way did it deserve to be neutered the way you and your team chopped it up.

Shame on you.

Do you guys also flying thebombers?
Without level stabalizer and a german course automatik that needs not seldom too long to stabilize and you fly over the target without the Lotfe showed its sight?
just beeing curious......

No - I wanna my Spit to have multile MFD's with IR, Radar, Night Vision and big IFF labels on my goggles. So I can clearly tell who my allies are and bomb them. ;)

Keeping it real.

+1 absolutely

Although I still don't own the game (without gaming rig at the moment due to a faulty ATI HD 5870) I completely agree.

Keep It Real Please !!!

Cheers,
MC

+1

+1
Full-switch all the way!!

Another one in the "Keep it real" camp.

Re. intruments, I understand if this is a quick fix and more realistic "instrument bounce" will be added later, but preferably add this fix to the lower-realism option please.
Re. Engine cutout, if you coded accurate Merlin cutout, please keep it so.

Close to American release this is probably a smart move from the developers. Of course this needs to be made optional in the GUI or at least in an ini file. "Full Real" should be exactly that.

If Maddox Games got their reputation for one thing, then it was the unwillingness to compromise on realism just because the community demands it. If ample proof is sent to improve on details, cool, but to change stuff, just because ppl "feel bad" is a sure way to go down into Sim oblivion.

+1

As Real As Possible!

And as the patch is out, can we start to discuss FM now?????
I'd like to have the planes their real weight and being able to reach the service ceiling.

+1 again. Don't dumb it down please.

I'd like to add my name to the list of those who wish the realism settings to remain.

By all means have a simple or real instrument setting to help out the novice pilots (and perhaps a corresponding server value) but please don't dumb down the settings to the lowest level.

Please don't turn this simulator into an arcade game.

+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1

I agree

+1
We definitely need realistic gauges and engine cut out.
Please, do yourselves a favor and aim at the right public, not casual gamers. We have had enough of casual titles lately....

+1

+1 for the Merlin

+0.5 for the analogue guages (they needed a bit of 'damping' for less deviation under normal flight) 'over damped' now!

+1, as accurate as you can get it thx

ps, will the 109 weights be fixed in mondays patch?

When bombs are loaded?

Eheeem.... sorry guys if I jump in but, who said that the way the mechanical dials have been jumping was indeed "realistic"?



~S~

PS. I can see some guys loading the flame-throwers.... :-D

+1, dont do the same like the old il2

Yepp!

+

without bombs 109 shows as being over takeoff weight. E3 is the same.

+ 1 million

This is the first real sim i've owned since ms flight sim 1998 and i'm loving it!

Spitfires and realism is what it is all about!

+1

full realism is a must in COD

Mechanical cable driven tachometers do not have 1000 rpm swings in their readings unless the drive cable is severely frayed, kinked, or otherwise totally worn out. What we have now is totally wrong.

Also the problem with Neg G cut out was happening in level flight with properly trimmed aircraft. It's not about push overs, which indeed should cause engine cut out.

Please don't make this a Red vs. Blue issue trying to compensate for the perceived over modeling of the Spitfire in IL2.

Originally Posted by SYN_Bliss View Post
As a realism squad - most definitely +1!

+1

And make it optional please

Ah rgrt, yeah ive not looked since the new patch, but on the last 1, the 109 with 4xSC50's was overweight even when i had the slider for the fuel on at 0% :-P

S!

+1

Signed!