DoubleTap

Uh, let's see... Pre-Compression DD_VS_Bbloke9 = 789 MB Post Installation of XviD + Compression using Virtual-dub = 62.3 MB Quality of DD_VS_Bbloke9XviD = Pretty Freakin' Sweet, even at max screen Yeah, I'd say that pretty does it.

Okee, doke.

I would have preferred the same mate- but bbloke has the hex on me and I was pulling tight to line up for the lead shot when - bang I lost it

The track of Bbloke and Delta7 dogfighting so impressed me, I made a quick little movie out of it.

Dave, apart from the second line fighter concept, I would not mind adding planes for each side as long as it "historically accurate" (I know that is a loaded term in many respects) and kept the balance. For instance, I think the P-40M is a neat little plane, and would have some value as a quick strike fighter, but I have no idea is there were anywhere near Normandy, or it was relegated to other theatres by then. Let me put together the updated manual with the planesets, and send you a copy, and see if there is anything that can be added. Here's a site I've found on the D-Day Allied air forces: US 9th TAF http://www3.sympatico.ca/angels_eight/9tac.html RAF 2nd TAF http://www3.sympatico.ca/angels_eight/2tac.html It's not an official site, but it looks well researched: official sites confirm most of these aircraft. Thank you very much for these. I was rooting around for a comprehensive listing of the air groups. The info pretty much follows the current plane set, and even mentions the Mustang III's I just added for the Allied Base CAP. What is interesting is while it lists the specific RAF aircraft generations (Mk IX, V, XI, etc) the USAAF does not.

Yes, this will be in the manual. I think I will take Bbloke's advice and set the server to 28.8k, and as always, I will turn off the skin downloads.

Dave, apart from the second line fighter concept, I would not mind adding planes for each side as long as it "historically accurate" (I know that is a loaded term in many respects) and kept the balance. For instance, I think the P-40M is a neat little plane, and would have some value as a quick strike fighter, but I have no idea is there were anywhere near Normandy, or it was relegated to other theatres by then. Let me put together the updated manual with the planesets, and send you a copy, and see if there is anything that can be added.

Yes, mate, if you could. Danka!

Holy #&$%! That IS an awesome story! Bright guy, and balls of steel. MAkes you wonder what kind of crap you could pull in IL2 with no icons...

Dave, not a problem. 3:30pm EST should be okay. I'd have a tough time starting later than that, though, due to previous plans. As far as plane sets go, we should be good. Remember, you helped me with these on the first go round. I think people were pretty happy with them overall. One thing, though, that I will have to get back to you on. In the interest of not breaking up player teams once established due to imbalances in pilot numbers, I wanted to include second tier fighters for both sides. The idea is that if Red for some reason has more pilots than Blue, instead of making those excess pilots switch, they would be limited to those older/less advanced fighters. I think the first mission is primarily the one I would need to figure this out, as the later missions have more options. What I would need input on are fighters that are A) fighters which are a significant, but not major, step down from the front-line fighters in Mission One, That are historically accurate, as far as in use in and around Normandy in '44. I will get back to you in regards to what the exact plane models we used the last time D-Day ran.

M8's, I am looking toward Saturday, October 14th as the day to fly the D-Day DF campaign again, from 2pm EST or so. People can announce which side they want to fly for in this thread. Hope everyone can make it. Doubletap

Dave, Interesting you say that because I have noticed that in missions the AI does not seem to be as uber. Why that is, whether its different programming in that situation, or the inability for the AI to concentrate on one target, I can't say. I guess what should really do is go online to DF servers a bit just to get some human interaction.

Dave, thanks for the files. I finally had time to open them up and started printing out a few. I am particularly interested in the one on energy management, as I think that is currently my biggest liability. On a somewhat related note, does anyone use quick mission builder to practice dogfighting? The reason I ask is that I question whether fighting AI is really worth it. I took a 1944 Mustang against a flight of 1940 or 41 Zeroes to practice boom and zoom, and it just seems they were able to pull crap off which is NOT feasible. Like, they manage to keep pace with me as I run unless I max out my engine, or they climb, and turn and GAIN on me as I do so as well. What seems most ridiculous is they can match my speed AND my climb for the most part if all I am doing is running. Makes it kind of hard to Boom and Zoom if you can't get any distance or height. I fully realize some of it can be do to me mishandling the airplane, and it is well acknowledged that AI do not blackout of burn out engines, etc. I guess my point is, do they act so unlike human pilots that practicing against them is of real limited use?

It is doable; I remember reading about it, and it is a matter of switching files, although I seem to recall it being a little more involved. You had to X, before Y, but not before Z, etc. As far as DCG and longer campaigns, I think that running them in short bursts is the best option for the group as many would like to switch to something new after a bit, and none of seems to have a whole lot of time to fly. The problem as I see it in trying to run larger campaigns is maintaining the focus from week to week and session to session. As in; where are we and what are we doing again? I know this from a few large scale board games I have played. What seems attractive about the Scorched Earth program is that it affords an ability for everyone to check up on the current progress online, and thus keep in touch with what is happening. I think the fact that you can directly affect the whole battlefield by issuing orders to ground troops, ships and supply lines would help keep people involved. Of course, I have never used it, so I am going by the description on the website. When using DCG, I think we would need to come up with some way to post overall progress on a regular basis, even if just an article about it after every session. At the very least, the mission debriefs could be copied posted from each mission in succession. That way, someone who has not been able to fly for 1 or more DCG sessions can get a sense of how things are going, AND it might motivate people to get more involved if it looks like their side is getting whipped. I am 100% behind doing a campaign of some sort. I love 'em. Before Roger started looking into SE, I was fiddling around with basic rules for doing order and movement manually for a small scale one. Getting a program to do the bulk of the work would be sweet.

Huh, really? Funny, my Mom wrote that on my last birthday card. Of course, there was a $100 check inside, so no harm done. Love you, Mom!

Not too bad Glenn, I haven't read the manual for quite a while though. But combined with our web server here and facilities @ home (for both Bbloke and myself) I'm pretty sure we can get a package together pretty soon. Roger, I looked through the Webpage's installation manual for this, and I was right the first time; in addition to some of this stuff being over my head, I don't seem to have the tools to implement it. If you plan to go forward with this (and it would rock if you did) let me know what I could do to help.

It was quite a fun night, and I wasn't even there for alot of it. Good job of hosting by Sged. Thanks! S!

Today is officially "I hate Kelly" day. All blues post suitable references to his manhood Kelly has manhood?!

It SHOULD be able to be placed on a ship's deck (for reasons of assisting Mission building), but the reason why you can place it on the mountain is that its still connected to the ground, I suppose. Why exactly they did not program the game to allow much more objects to be placed upwards I am not sure. Perhaps modeling gravity or something?

Well, you can achieve the same thing with the ship by really forcing down the rate of fire. The other problem is that you can't raise the AAA above sea level, so you can't place it on the deck.

No problem. The problem I DO have is that I have been getting some good campaign ideas and don't have time to work on them all. Colin sent me an idea for a mini-campaign that actually uses a variant of the scouting idea using dedicated Recon planes, and I still have not been able to tackle guitarman's suggestions for a Battle Of Britain one, although I think it would also be alot of fun. (sigh)

That's what I thought. Thanks!

Thanks for info on the B-17’s and the 500lbs. That seems right to me, and I should have used that allocation in the campaign from the outset. I think this would have made the B-17’s a little less lethal on their bomb runs. Also, the info on the AAA is helpful. I am not an expert on the particular ordinance used in any given time and theater, so it tends to be guessimate. I can tell you that AAA was turned down pretty far already for the ships, a ROF of 20 max, and in most cases rookie in any event. I will reduce them further for next outing. I have to say I disagree with you on the US carriers in Mission One for 2 reasons, related to one another. I think that the US CV’s factored greatly in the first part of the battle, even though they did not take direct part in it early on. The threat of the American carriers, which Nagumo could not discount whether he thought he had achieved surprise or not, factored into his later decisions. While the IJN hoped they would be able to knock out Midway unmolested and await the American response (ie, Carriers), they could not be sure they were not in the area. Recall that the reason why Nagumo’s carriers was found with his decks piled high with fueling planes, bombs and torpedoes were the conflicting desires to both knock out Midway and prepare for the appearance on the American carriers. As I recall it, Nagumo planned to place torpedoes on his planes returning from Midway because he could not be sure where the carriers were; back at Pearl, or somewhere close. Then, when word came that Midway had not been neutralized, he ordered bombs be reloaded onto the planes. It was just after that ordinance suffle that the torpedo bombers from Task Force 16 and 17 showed up, one after another. Nagumo now knew the American carriers, one more than he even expected, were in the area. He then ordered the bombs removed and the torpedoes replaced. Then, of course, the SBD’s showed up and absolutely ruined his day. My point is that even though the US carriers’ first attack (the TBF’s) did not arrive until after the initial sortie against Midway, the mere threat of them and the rest of American carrier force played a large part in subsequent events. In addition, had things gone a little differently, they could have played a part in the initial battle. For instance, what would have happened had some of the Wildcats from the US carriers shown up to defend Midway on the initial Japanese strike, targeting the Vals and Kates needed to attack the American fleet? What if the American planes had found the Japanese fleet earlier, perhaps as they were attempting to land, low on fuel? What would have happened had the Japanese discovered that the American fleet was already at Midway much earlier on, and had performed a much less chaotic session or rearming? That leads into my second reason, which was I wanted to present the basic situation as it stood on June 4th, in Hell-Divers! This was mostly an enjoyment factor for the campaign. While pilots on both teams can play things out as they historically occurred, the idea was to allow for several different scenarios to play out. It all depends on what strategy each plans to follow, and how well they execute them. Having said that, I DO like the idea of breaking up the second mission into two parts. How exactly I will do that I am not sure, but I think going to the 3 part format for the mission would make things both easier to manage and more interesting. Even here, however, I want the results of the battle as open as possible to the actions of the pilots as possible.