PDA

View Full Version : Bomber and twin-engined pilots: give me your suggestions and bug reports



Blackdog_kt
Jun-09-2012, 19:07
Greetings everyone.

I've started a thread over at 1c dealing specifically with bombers and multi-crewed/multi-engined aircraft (that includes the Stuka and the 110 as well).

My goal is to get some exposure for whatever issues prevent us from effectively flying bombers in the sim and apply some pressure to get them fixed. With the graphics optimizations nearing completion and the fighter FMs being revised, two of the most popular areas of complaint for the majority of the playerbase are close to being addressed for good, so i thought that leaves room to deal with something else that's equally important but usually overlooked.

After all, fighters have no reason to scramble and climb out if no bombers are near :thumbsup:

I'm explaining things in more detail in that particular thread so i'll cut the introduction a bit short here, anyone who's interested can read the whole thing over at 1c.

What i'm asking for is for any willing bomber pilots to read that thread, follow the posting guidelines (which are meant to help me combine the information in a time-efficient manner and keep the thread readable for everyone involved) and report:


whatever bugs they have found
whatever modeling errors they have found (from simple 3D modelling errors and reversed control animations, to incorrect areas of the FM, inaccurate modeling of aircraft systems and missing loadouts/equipment)
any suggestions they have that would make flying a bomber a better experience and/or more realistic


Even if you have nothing to add to the list i have already compiled, take a moment to read it and maybe you can answer a few questions that have popped up. Essentially what i'm trying to do is collect any potential issues, test how things work in the sim, get some data on how they worked in real life and compare them so that we can determine what is a bug and what is not.

Thread is over here: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?p=433565#post433565

It's quite a long read but i've split the introduction from the actual bugs and suggestions list (which starts on the 2nd post from the top), so that you can skim through it with more convenience.

I'll be personally moderating that thread and if enough people show interest it will be stickied too. This is our chance to get our bombers fixed guys, go go go! Also, any fighter boys who know what's good for them will support this effort too...the sooner we can properly get up in groups of 10-20 the sooner you'll get nice fat targets to shoot at :Grin:

ATAG_Snapper
Jun-09-2012, 20:10
We've got top notch bomber pilots for both sides here, some of whom don't necessarily frequent or post over at 1C.

Their input would, as always, be gratefully appreciated here. :thumbsup:

Blackdog_kt
Jun-09-2012, 23:53
It would certainly make things easier for me if i could have a central location to collect information instead of three (i posted over on simHQ as well), but we can certainly work something out.

So, if this post generates any responses, just give me a shout over at the 1c thread and i'll come to extract the information :thumbsup:

ATAG_Snapper
Jun-10-2012, 10:17
Fair enough, Blackdog.

This is an important project, and the timing is now. I will certainly act as go between since I'm over at 1C frequently.

There's a lot of valuable online experience centered here, so it's vital we get any ideas & suggestions to improve the LW &RAF bombers over to you ASAP.

Snapper

Blackdog_kt
Jun-10-2012, 14:31
Thanks a lot for your time and your responses in this and the climb rate thread (i think i'll stop replying there though, because i'm derailing it somewhat :Grin: ).

I don't know if they can make the changes in time for the next patch but i think they will at some point, previous history is encouraging. I put in a bit of work starting and maintaining the Blenheim thread and many ATAG pilots helped me on that one too. The end result what that 1c got around to fixing quite a few stuff as a result.

So i think that if we repeat this, we'll manage to get all bombers to a proper state.

Dutch
Jun-11-2012, 08:33
Comments re Blenheim posted in the 1C thread.

Making a complete balls-up of the Blenheim is what was the last straw with me n 'the patch', in retrospect.

:angry:

MajorBorris
Jun-11-2012, 11:37
Fair enough, Blackdog.

This is an important project, and the timing is now. I will certainly act as go between since I'm over at 1C frequently.

There's a lot of valuable online experience centered here, so it's vital we get any ideas & suggestions to improve the LW &RAF bombers over to you ASAP.

Snapper

I agree, the timing is perfect now to get some work done on these bombers!

We have waited paitiently untill performance and other critical aspecs of the sim were attended to.

Lets get these twins fixed and help Blackdog at the 1c forum!

Blackdog_kt
Jun-12-2012, 02:30
Thanks for taking the time to help me out guys. I think we are getting some attention and the thread is very readable, but i'll be compiling the replies into the main list at the start of the thread as time allows, just in case.

I know they got some people reading posts like these in the forums but still, the easier it is for them to get information about what's wrong, the higher the chances of getting them fixed.

P.S. If anyone can chip in about the Stuka it would be great, as it's the only bomber completely missing from that thread.

Doc
Jun-12-2012, 12:11
I need to check that thread again there is an issue with the 110 fuel tanks that Keller can explain better than I.

Hopefully he will pry himself off of ARMA II for a few minutes and look at this thread.

:bgsmile:

Blackdog_kt
Jun-17-2012, 12:16
I haven't had enough free time to update the list either, hopefully i can get to it starting tomorrow evening.

About the 110, i think the fuel selectors don't match the selectors for the fuel gauge. The 110 has four tanks you can select from and the fuel gauge can be "tuned" to display fuel levels in each one of them.

I don't exactly remember the nature of the problem, it's either the fuel selectors pointing to the wrong tank (for example, you set it for rear left but it draws fuel from another one), or the fuel gauge reading off of the wrong tank (so that for example, you set it to display left front but it displays left rear, or something).

If anybody has tested this and can come up with an exact description it would be great. Kodoss has a thread on 110 bugs/errors over at 1c that i also have to compile in the main list of issues, i already described the lack of MG-FF/M and the high octane version, if we get the fuel system bugs reported too we could say we have rounded out the 110 for the most part.

Good catch though, i had completely forgotten about this. Group effort paying off and all that :)