Oleg Maddox's Room #1

[=KAG=Bersrk]

Only C-4 and it will be flyable

THX for answer Oleg!

Very sad

Actually Erpr.Gr.210 started Battle of Britain, were the most successfull Bf110 unit during it and in nov40 - jan 41 were "the only day bombers", continued flying antiship operations over the channel.

Bf110D-0/B or D-3 could add some more really interest to the game.
Production:

"Caesar"

Bf110C-1: 195 from 1.39 to 2.40
Bf110C-2: 359 from 9.39 to 7.40 (some of them received MG-FF/M on summer 1940, "converting it to C-4")
Bf110C-4: 155 from 4.40 to 9.40
Bf110C-7: 39 from 7.40 to 9.40

"Dora"

Bf110D-0: 83 from 3.40 to 8.40
Bf110D-0>D-1: 21 from 7.40 to 8.40
Bf110D-0/B>D-3: 18 from 8.40 to 8.40
Bf110D-2: 73 from 7.40 to 9.40
Bf110D-3: 254 from 7.40 to 3.41

"Emil"

Bf110E-1: 334 from 8.40 to 8.41

Anyway, I appreciate all the choise.

[nearmiss]

Complex Engine Management we need variations

It is amazing how many Online servers allow only CEM. I do the Online for enjoyment and going through all the processes of CEM is just a nuisance. Afterall, we are flying a computer.

Currently, I have an X-Keys (macro programmable keyboard). I simply have macros that set the prop pitch according to % throttle. I have my little macros set efficiently to do as good as I could do for most part. Afterall, I make several C.E.M. adjustments on the basis of other adjustments, i.e, raise prop pitch when I raise throttle, or lower prop pitch when I lower throttle, open cowls when I'm high throttle too long, etc.

I suggest a toggle for allowing NO CEM, but the toggle is a very competent automatic CEM management system. Let people that want to go through all the keystrokes do their thing for CEM, let people like me that care less for all the keystrokes. I want to do well online, but I don't care to make it so complicated.

I fly WW2 sims, because I like things more simple. I don't fly Falcon 4.0 or other complex sims.

Are you thinking to have C.E.M.
1. For those players that want to make all the keystokes,
2. For those players that want automatic C.E.M. that is pre-set very competently by the sim
3. For those players that want automatic C.E.M. that is just O.K.

[jasonbirder]

I'd rather have more realistic CEM as opposed to the fairly generic system we have at present...let it be modelled for each individual aircraft/engine type and have a realistic effect on performance.
Realistic fuel systems including the need to switch fuel tanks and modelling their effect ona planes COG would be nice too

[nearmiss]

Originally Posted by jasonbirder

I'd rather have more realistic CEM as opposed to the fairly generic system we have at present...let it be modelled for each individual aircraft/engine type and have a realistic effect on performance.
Realistic fuel systems including the need to switch fuel tanks and modelling their effect ona planes COG would be nice too

There are complex games now that answer peoples need for the complex,i.e, MSFT FLight Simulator and X-Plane flight simulator. You can do all the buttons, controls and complex navigation. You talk about getting with it, you can even fly virtual airlines, with all the ATC, FAA approach and departure charting, along with complex flight plans, etc. You can in fact build a flight plan you can fly in the real world and execute it on the on of those flight simulators without ever leaving the ground.

I do CFS2, IL2 and the BOB II. Just keeping up with all the different keystroke commands is an exercise in memory management. Then you poke in C.E.M. and to be honest I'm overwhelmed. I just don't want all that complexity to have a little fun.

In fact, I understand there is a new X-keys programmable keyboard that will allow keeping files of your keystrokes. You can effectively create a file for Il2, a file for BOB II, and a file for CFS2. Then the keystrokes on the programmable keyboard can be programmed for the same functions for all sims. All the user has to do is remember one set of keystrokes and the macro files sort out the memory wizardry.

http://www.xkeys.com/

That makes a lot of sense to me. Then of course there are some variations on things in the sims that don't quite work the same, but for the most part there are enough commands that do the same thing to make it worth the effort to build the files.

I have three large file case size boxes full of combat flight sim games. I mean I've got all the Jane's stuff, EAW, RedBaron, etc.

So, maybe over the years I've become an overwhelmed player. I mean memory wise. I would love to go back and play some of those old games that have been upgraded, i.e., Longbow, Enemy Engaged, EAW, USAF, Jane's F/A-18, Falcon 4.0: Allied Force, but it'll take a couple weeks just to catch up on the keystrokes for one of those great old sim games.

SO... yes I have a reason for wanting to inhibit some of the complexity that others seem to enjoy. I don't think I'm alone in this, because I recognize alot of the nicknames, like mine that have been hanging around flight sim forums since...the old DOS Jet game. LOL

[robtek]

@nearmiss
As more complex as better -> it trains the situational awareness when you have to fight
and to control all aspects of the plane.
Then you can profit from the automatic systems the german planes had and the allied didn´t, like the automatic prop pitch in the 109 or the motor management unit in the 190.
That is very important in a semi realistic sim of ww2.

[bomath]

robtek, you fail to see the point: yes, it's almost unreal that Oleg and his crew put all the effort to model CEM. But the big let-down is that you can't simply fly most of the planes without fiddling waaay to much, while online.
More than 90% of the online servers require CEM; there should have been the users' option if they want it or not; give me an OK-ish automanagement and I'll be happy to join in. If you want to personally manage the engine, great; but I don't want, yet I'm forced to.

With optional automanagement, the game would still compute the inner workings.

[Blackdog_kt]

I think when people say CEM in BoB, they don't mean complex starting procedures and engine warm up. What they mean is correct use of throttle, pitch and mixture combinations.

I would like to see this modeled as well and Oleg's latest answers somewhat confirm that they've planned something like this, probably according to aircraft manuals of the time.

Of course, some people would not like this. Well, the solution is simple. It should be a realism setting just like black outs, realistic gunnery and so on. Maybe have more than an on/off option, say something like no CEM, simple (AI aided) CEM and full complex CEM.

However, in an online game it wouldn't make sense to allow an on-the-fly switch between CEM modes. It should be a realism setting that's enforced by the server. Why? Well, for the reason robtek mentioned. If i go online and fly an aircraft with an automatic system, i obviously want an aircraft with an advantage in engine management and trade something else for it. If i want good maneuverability i'll fly a Spitfire, if i want to have carefree engine handling i'll fly a 109.

It would make absolutely no sense to allow multiple CEM realism settings in the same server environment, as this obviously becomes an advantage for those using AI assisted CEM and also forces everyone else to use it too. In a high/full real server and such a server's admin and player population these things obviously matter.

Imagine for example flying in a locked cockpit server. Does it make sense to allow people to choose if they want to enable external views with the same ease they can switch the speedbar between metric and imperial units? Of course it doesn't, because then even those who wanted to fly a cockpit-only map would be forced to use externals to make up for the other player's advantage.

Make it a setting in the realism panel and there will be servers that run with simplified CEM and complex CEM, so everyone can take their pick. If however people who want to fly with complex CEM are forced to compete with people who want simplified CEM, then they will be rightfully annoyed that someone is essentially dragging their intended realism settings down.

[JG53Frankyboy]

Originally Posted by robtek

@nearmiss
As more complex as better -> it trains the situational awareness when you have to fight
and to control all aspects of the plane.
Then you can profit from the automatic systems the german planes had and the allied didn´t, like the automatic prop pitch in the 109 ....................................

im still ooking forward what kind of propellersystem MAddox will programm in SoW:BoB
->

[41Sqn_Banks]

Originally Posted by JG53Frankyboy

im still ooking forward what kind of propellersystem MAddox will programm in SoW:BoB

That's one of the main questions for both "sides".

Maybe we have to choose between 2-pitch (Hurri, Spit) and manual variable pitch (Bf 109, Bf 110) ... disputable which one is better.

2-pitch allows easy flying without much thinking about engine RPM (except for power dive) but you will have suboptimal power output while climbing or in combat. (The "fine" setting was only allowed for take-off and landing, not for climbing or fighting)

Manual variable pitch requires constantly attention on the engine rpm and adjusting the propeller pitch, but when set properly gives you optimal power in any situation. If set wrong you get suboptimal power in the best case, but in the worst case it kills your engine in a few seconds.

Or we have constant speed for Hurricane and Spitfire and automatic for Bf 109 and Bf 110, then not much will change to the current situation. Propaby damage from overloading the engine with high boost and low rpm with the constant speed unit.