PDA

View Full Version : LagG-3 roll rate



gavagai
Sep-22-2013, 21:53
http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/1378-developer-diary-part-33/page-3

I measured the LagG-3 roll rate to be about 150 degrees/second. That would put it in the realm of the clipped wing Spit and Fw 190A. Those of you who preordered and care about historical accuracy would do well to post in that thread to solicit a response.

I have never seen data for the LagG-3 roll rate, but I would be very surprised that a fighter with such a bad reputation actually rolled so well. Is this shaping up to be Rise of Flight all over again? I hope not.

Dutch
Sep-22-2013, 22:16
Those of you who preordered and care about historical accuracy would do well to post in that thread to solicit a response.

I pre-ordered and I also care about historical accuracy, but I don't think criticizing from a such a tiny piece of evidence is worth the effort at this stage.

gavagai
Sep-22-2013, 23:14
You have me confused, Dutch. All I'm saying is that it would be nice to hear something from 777 about the LagG-3 roll rate, like "actually, we have this test document here that says it rolled like a 190."

They have left some pretty bad errors in Rise of Flight for 4+ years now and it would be shame to see BoS end up the same way.

Dutch
Sep-22-2013, 23:41
You have me confused, Dutch. All I'm saying is that it would be nice to hear something from 777 about the LagG-3 roll rate, like "actually, we have this test document here that says it rolled like a 190."

They have left some pretty bad errors in Rise of Flight for 4+ years now and it would be shame to see BoS end up the same way.

I have to say that I don't really care. Stalingrad will be a flight sim. Rise of Flight is a flight sim that I spent a lot of money on but never really flew in anger as it were. I don't really give a hoot whether the roll rates are correct for the LaGG-3 in a game that hasn't even been released yet.

I only care about whether I have fun in the game, and I probably will..

PFT_Endy
Sep-23-2013, 04:16
Oh, right. ok. I have to say that I don't really care. Stalingrad will be a flight sim. Rise of Flight is a flight sim that I spent a lot of money on but never really flew in anger as it were. I don't really give a shit whether the roll rates are correct for the LaGG-3 in a game that hasn't even been released yet.

I only care about whether I have fun in the game, and I probably will..

I'm confused...So you don't care about proper flight models in non arcade flight sims, including CloD and might as well play it if a 109 outturned a Spit or a Hurricane had twice the speed of a 109?

jaydee
Sep-23-2013, 05:13
We haven't even got BOS to fly yet and some people have got there "Critical Microscope " out to find fault !..I echo Dutchs comments ~S~

PFT_Endy
Sep-23-2013, 05:41
We haven't even got BOS to fly yet and some people have got there "Critical Microscope " out to find fault !..I echo Dutchs comments ~S~

If you don't start complaining now about flight models as soon as you see something not working properly, chances are you will get the same stuff in the final product. People always say "hey, it's only alpha/beta/pre release and they've got plenty of time to fix it" shouting over anyone who is in any degree critical and then they're surprised they get a shitty product because the devs thought people don't care at all. I thought people would learn that by now...

If you don't start asking if that's correct now, how accurate that is, will it be accurate etc. they will just do whatever and you'll get a second RoF with ahistorical FMs. Since it's alpha this is the exact time to notice this stuff and ask for changes, that's the whole point of it since it's not a ready product yet. That's the whole point of alpha and other phases of the dev cycle, easiest and also most appropriate time to introduce changes now, not later when the game is released...

Show them your support and show them you care about historical accuracy. And now, when it's still being developed.

Foul Ole Ron
Sep-23-2013, 05:51
Yeah I'd agree. The devs are making a big song and dance about how fantastic and detailed their flight models are. Don't see anything wrong with commenting when we see something that looks way off. If it was a bit off then no worries but when something looks that wrong it's worth calling out for a clarification.

gavagai
Sep-23-2013, 07:38
I thought people would learn that by now...

Nope! It's always the same list of pseudological arguments:

"It's a game, after all."

"It can never be 100% accurate."

"You complain too much. You're a whiner."

"Can't you just enjoy it and have fun?"

"Stop slagging on the devs."

"It's all done with math and physics, so it's more right than any answer you could come up with."

"It's all subjective after all."

and on and on and on.... Now we have, "it's only alpha." It's quite an extensive list that has been trotted out over the years, and I could probably list even more.

This LagG-3 roll rate is the critical moment for 777 to show us that it has learned something from its RoF FM experience.

9./JG52 Ziegler
Sep-23-2013, 08:18
Interesting graph you posted on the Dev blog Gavagai :thumbsup: I'll play wait and see till the beta is available. I'm in agreement that they, the developers, know that we know, and are watching to see if the historical promise lives up.

ATAG_Lolsav
Sep-23-2013, 08:20
As a "non believer" of 777 studios (see ROF) i dont expect anything to be heard from any kind of complains regarding flight models. In this case its up to consumers to see if they learned the lesson, by backing up a product they know it will not meet the standards, as happened in the past.

You can complain all you want, for them what it matters is that you buy the plane and buy the next, and the next, and the next.... As long you buy it you are allowed to complain all night long.

In my case, im backing DCS II because i believe the producer, with names who gave me the top of the art regarding combat simulators in the last 10 years. So, in the end, i guess all resumes to "confidence" in the product.

Sorry if its a bit off topic, i just wanted to center the argument in what i think its the core: Or you believe or you dont in the product of 777. I dont.

Headshot
Sep-23-2013, 08:32
It's a shame there seems to be a contest developing between game titles.

ATAG_Lolsav
Sep-23-2013, 09:34
It's a shame there seems to be a contest developing between game titles.

Why shame? The more, the merrier. Im for free enterprise! And for free speech aswell :)

ATAG_Snapper
Sep-23-2013, 09:42
I think competition is a good thing, it forces the publishers to "up their game" to command marketshare. Gotta love free enterprise. :D

Dutch
Sep-23-2013, 12:58
I'm confused...So you don't care about proper flight models in non arcade flight sims, including CloD and might as well play it if a 109 outturned a Spit or a Hurricane had twice the speed of a 109?

Ok, let me try to clarify my little rant of last night. Stalingrad is in development, not even at the beta stage, and people are getting their knickers in a twist about the roll rate seen in a vid clip. Flight models are without doubt the most contentious and difficult aspects of a Flight Simulator to get right. We all know this.
Team Fusion are still working on getting Cliffs of Dover's FMs as near to historical fact as possible and it's a long labour intensive chore, the results of which will always be criticized by some.

I 'don't care' about the perceived FMs of a pre-beta simulation in development. I do 'care' about the FMs of modern flight sims already available. Very much so, although I do have a chuckle sometimes about the fuss made in RoF about FMs, like as if those crates of wood and canvas all performed exactly the same as eachother as they came off the production line. :D

So I apologise if last night's post sounded a little mad, but I don't see any point in criticizing such a specific aspect of a game that hasn't even reached beta stage.

:)

PFT_Endy
Sep-23-2013, 13:31
Ah, well that explains a lot, it sounded to me like you don't care about FMs at all :)

But I can't agree with the "it's not even in beta" argumentation you and some others try to promote, although I don't doubt that in good faith. If you look at my post, of at what Gavagai wrote, people always say "it's only beta" and similar arguments and don't care enough to notice, report and ask the developers for changes when the game is still in it's best phase to be changed. That's also why there's so many bad products around, because people don't complain loud enough when the game is still in development using just such arguments and shouting over any valid criticism. The "let the devs be" approach unfortunately does not work. If you don't start pushing on them right now, pointing out obvious errors etc. they might as well not notice the problem or think people are ok with some stuff.

Unfortunately this is how it works in game development and I've seen enough examples of that kind of style where people were mightily surprised some issues were not fixed until release and even later only because they hushed anyone with a critical attitude with the "it's only beta, they have time" argument. In other words, if you want to have a good product then now is the exact and pretty much only time to point every tiny single error etc. because otherwise these things will most probably be still there at release.

gavagai
Sep-23-2013, 15:39
I do have a chuckle sometimes about the fuss made in RoF about FMs, like as if those crates of wood and canvas all performed exactly the same as eachother as they came off the production line. :D

I only know of one WW1 air power historian (it's his actual job) who played Rise of Flight, and he quit partly as a result of the flight models.

=BKHZ=Furbs
Sep-24-2013, 04:24
I agree the roll rate looks too fast, but unless we know... 1st- the real roll rate of the Lagg at that speed and 2nd- the FMs are finished and are not changing, then there is not much we can say.

The beta testing period is coming soon, that's the best time to ask questions and query any FM problems, i know i will.

Headshot
Sep-24-2013, 05:21
Having more than one game being developed is great and supporting them both will benefit the flight sim community into the future. But I have seen people starting to criticise BOS(for things that until release is a bit premature), then rave about DCS. I have supported both and will continue to play COD and my DCS P51. Please if I have it wrong about some peoples bias just ignore me (thats what my wife does).

Foul Ole Ron
Sep-24-2013, 06:28
It's natural that people comment on what's presented to them. If they see something that they perceive as wrong they'll say so. The internet is full of people who like to get their spoke in. I don't think it's a BOS vs DCS thing. If Ilya shows a video where a P47 outspeeds a 262 the same thing will happen (though probably with a lot more volume than 777 are hearing over the Lagg roll rate).

RAF74_Buzzsaw
Sep-24-2013, 13:49
Salute

Here's a perspective from someone who spends his time trying to make the CoD FM's as close to historical as possible and who is very concerned to have every parameter as accurate as possible:

We have a motto in the FM development team:

FM's are not perfect and never will be.

The fact is, these are games, made for the general public, and not 4 million dollar flight trainers built by the USAF with unlimited resources. There will always be compromises.

However, an FM team should be responsive to their community and should be aware of their input. They should consider all the data submitted to them. (I don't consider uninformed whines as data :-P )

BoS is in the early stages. It is quite possible the LaGG-3 is overrated in its lateral maneuverability. BUT, that has not been confirmed with testing, and I would suggest that those who are concerned, that they gather historical data, wait till the beta becomes available and then test the aircraft. If there is a problem, it will become clear then. At that point they can bring their concerns to the developers.

It is true the FM's in RoF are significantly flawed. Aircraft as important to the game and history as the Albatros variations are clearly too slow. (they have other issues too) The DH-2 is also too slow, the Sopwith Dolphin shows an ahistorical tendency to turn over on landing, etc. etc. I could go on with a list. And the developers unfortunately don't seem interested in addressing the errors.

But until the BoS aircraft are there to test, all of the comments about its FM are just speculation.

PFT_Endy
Sep-24-2013, 15:42
Except that you don't need historical tables to be able to be able to say that something is off. Now if someone said it's off by 0,4876 seconds he'd better have proof for it, but it's rather obvious that it's too fast when you know FW190 turned at around 155 degrees per second and you see the Lagg doing the same or better. You're using the same logical fallacy as someone claiming that you can't say that something's not red but pink unless you own a spectrometer and are a specialist in the area.

And like some here mentioned including me, the sooner you start commenting on this stuff the sooner it will get attention from the devs. The earlier stage of development such stuff is noticed and commented on the better the chance it will get fixed, and fixed properly. You should NEVER wait if you see some problems if you care about the game. If I saw a P47 outspeed a 262 in DCS WWII I would shout twice as loud as I care about that game even more.

Arthursmedley
Sep-24-2013, 15:55
You should NEVER wait if you see some problems if you care about the game.



You know the Banana forum? Sometimes it is better to wait.

PFT_Endy
Sep-24-2013, 16:01
You know the Banana forum? Sometimes it is better to wait.

I know the banana forum but you missed the point here. The game is still in development and now is the precise time to deliver some feedback on what you see. Chances are if enough people care it's gonna change. And the sooner the better. If you wait and wait before pointing out mistakes because "it's beta/alpha/they have time" chances are you're gonna get something else than what you wished for.

Ah, and by delivering feedback I don't necessarily mean bashing the game. Just pointing out stuff you think is wrong, asking questions. There's really no shame in that.

gavagai
Sep-24-2013, 18:01
Salute

Here's a perspective from someone who spends his time trying to make the CoD FM's as close to historical as possible and who is very concerned to have every parameter as accurate as possible:

We have a motto in the FM development team:

FM's are not perfect and never will be.

See my list of fallacies above. That something cannot be done perfectly is not a reason to throw up our hands and say "whatever." Imagine if we laid off the police because they will never catch all of the criminals or do their jobs perfectly. Sorry if I am reacting strongly, but Jason is fond of saying "it will never be perfect" as a foil to dismiss our FM concerns. I am a thinking person and I will never buy that kind of pseudologic. I know you are not saying "whatever," but the point remains that the impossibility of perfection is no reason to tolerate shoddiness.



BoS is in the early stages. It is quite possible the LaGG-3 is overrated in its lateral maneuverability. BUT, that has not been confirmed with testing, and I would suggest that those who are concerned, that they gather historical data, wait till the beta becomes available and then test the aircraft. If there is a problem, it will become clear then. At that point they can bring their concerns to the developers.

It is true the FM's in RoF are significantly flawed. Aircraft as important to the game and history as the Albatros variations are clearly too slow. (they have other issues too) The DH-2 is also too slow, the Sopwith Dolphin shows an ahistorical tendency to turn over on landing, etc. etc. I could go on with a list. And the developers unfortunately don't seem interested in addressing the errors.

But until the BoS aircraft are there to test, all of the comments about its FM are just speculation.

In Rise of Flight the beta testers have repeatedly met with "it's too late" when they try to point out errors or FM flaws that should be addressed.

As for BoS, it is not mere speculation. The video was there to see, and we have clocks. On pain of repetition, what is concerning here is not that the roll rate might be wrong, but that 777 is doing its usual stonewalling thing and is not talking about it. Even more concerning is the relative silence in the BoS community.

Time will tell us who is right. If I am wrong I will post here again and you can call me foolish. What I see shaping up is Rise of Flight all over again.

Archie
Sep-24-2013, 19:02
Didn't they once mention a ridiculous $ figure to go back and fix the RoF FM's? I have heard that some RoF beta testers have given up in frustration, but, if the devs want to get things right, now is the time, not later, when they will say the usual 'no time' or 'no money'.
Unless the vast majority of BoS players are really not bothered with the flight models, serious errors will cause much knashing ot teeth on the forums.

RAF74_Buzzsaw
Sep-24-2013, 19:07
See my list of fallacies above. That something cannot be done perfectly is not a reason to throw up our hands and say "whatever."

And if you knew the amount of time spent trying to get the CoD FM's right, you wouldn't say that. Nobody's throwing up their hands and saying 'Whatever' on my team.

But I, as someone who actually is hands on, and as someone who knows exactly what is or is not modelled, can tell you it is impossible to get it 'perfect'.

There are not enough processors and not enough lines of code to take into account all the variables of real life aerodynamics. And no matter what someone promises you on the promotional blurb, the fact is they don't have a perfect FM, and can't take into account all the elements which bear on the performance of real life aircraft.

Yes, you can get pretty close, but 'perfect'... NO. Anyone who claims that is so full of the brown stuff it is coming out their mouth.

I think you're jumping the gun on BoS, you should wait till the beta in my opinion.

But that's just my opinion, in the world of Flight Sims, there are as many opinions as there are virtual pilots and they all have the same value.

gavagai
Sep-25-2013, 00:51
Buzzsaw, I specifically said that I know you are not saying "whatever."
I know you are not saying "whatever,"

Please read my whole argument before you react. You speak as if you think I believe in perfect FMs or something silly. I do not. The point is that the impossibility of perfection is not an argument. :salute:

P.S. If I seem to be jumping the gun, it's because you cannot overestimate my distrust of 777 for what they've done to RoF (it's not only FMs).:thumbsup:

ATAG_NakedSquirrel
Sep-25-2013, 03:38
http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/1378-developer-diary-part-33/page-3
I have never seen data for the LagG-3 roll rate, but...

:salute:

Congrats!

You are the first person to complain about FMs for a game that has not been released!

:thumbsup:

PFT_Endy
Sep-25-2013, 04:27
:salute:

Congrats!

You are the first person to complain about FMs for a game that has not been released!

:thumbsup:

No, it's actually you and some others trying to diss it by making it sound like a pretentious complaint while if you read carefully the previous posts this is all about getting people's and devs' attention to something that looks way off in order to make the game better and more realistic, and all this while it is still in its best phase for changes ie. development, not release version.

It's like we're talking in circles - some are genuinely concerned about seemingly wrong FM's that were shown and ask questions why this is so, what's the data behind it, is it final or will it be changed etc. These are all valid questions and definately deserve answering, and we haven't seen that at all yet. It's hard to believe some don't even care to see a dev respond to it in some way..."because it's alpha" and all that...

ATAG_Bliss
Sep-25-2013, 11:23
:salute:

Congrats!

You are the first person to complain about FMs for a game that has not been released!

:thumbsup:

Im sorry Squirrel but I'd be complaining as well. FMs are the epitome of having a good flight sim. When the ROF team came back and said it will cost too much money to fix their wrong FMs, I see every reason to complain as early as possible.

Even in Clods disastrous state at release, patch after patch FMs were revised. That's something any development team has to do if you are truly serious about accuracy. The ROF team instead avoids those discussions. Same thing they are doing in the ask Devs the questions thread. They pick and choose what to answer.

As you've maybe noticed Yo-Yo has already posted charts on the upcoming Dora over at ED. Let me know when you get a single piece of FM data the 777 people are developing so customers can compare things. I've yet to see it.

Now I'm really not that bothered by FMs, but how the planes historically perform compared to each other. As gav has already stated, ROF is probably the worst sim in history for FM historical accuracy on how the planes performed against each other. That is why after 4 years the game is not growing, but in fact, doing the opposite.

So I only hope people's complaints are actually acknowledged. There are quite a few hands in the old Il2 community that won't put of with those sort of things. They have a big crowd to please and one that is used to what a game called IL2 can do. I'm afraid many people are going to be in for a rude awakening, especially MP.

=BKHZ=Furbs
Sep-25-2013, 14:18
BOS is still 6 months away from release, maybe 1 month from early access, so that's 5 months worth of FM testing and everything else to talked about in the forums, im sure anyone who has doubts about anything BOS including FM's will have plenty of time to decide if its worth their money.

Old_Canuck
Sep-26-2013, 03:40
BOS is still 6 months away from release, maybe 1 month from early access, so that's 5 months worth of FM testing and everything else to talked about in the forums, im sure anyone who has doubts about anything BOS including FM's will have plenty of time to decide if its worth their money.

With the right technique you can snap roll a Cessna 150.


http://youtu.be/OBH_Mb0Kj2s

gavagai
Sep-26-2013, 09:58
Canuck,

The LagG-3 roll we are discussing was explicitly aileron only.

Zisi
Sep-27-2013, 11:21
You are the first person to complain about FMs for a game that has not been released!

I doubt that XD

My opinion on this is such: If the developer is serious about making a good FM they should be grateful for constructive criticism on the more glaring issues present in the media they release. Especially during the beta stage of the game where polish is the primary goal. It is far more common that such issues are not fixed by release than when they are. It is important that a consumer makes their wishes clear, especially if post release we can only expect a couple patches before the whole thing is dropped like with clod.

I am hugely grateful for team fusion's effort with clod, they have really turned this into a fantastic game that I am enjoying immensely. A modding community is a positive for any game, however I think most of us would agree that many of the things they have been working on really should have been things the developer should have addressed such as performance and the visibility issues.

If you look back before clod's release, I'm sure one could find critical posts on topics that were only resolved years later by TF. As well as posts in response to those stating: "It's only alpha". When an issue is found, it's in the developers corner to respond, if no response is made assume its final, it generally is.

All that being said, if the lagg-3's roll rate is the biggest issue with the game, then I'm greatly looking forward to it. We will see.