Well, that qualifies you to work for a bunch like us - skinners, nitpickers and rivetcounters.
Mister A. N. "Al" Retentive for president!
(Oh, I forgot - you already are the president of the B.O.C., Lou!)

After much mucking about I have found a way to stop the 'reasons for death' being asked for every pilot whether dead or not. There is a fault in the software that I have reported but I have managed to find a cludge that gets around the problem.

So, if your pilot is reported as 'dead' you will see an extra screen which asks the reason. The reasons I have put there are as follows:
Shot down by aircraft
Shot down by ground fire
Collided with enemy
Collided with wingman
Engine failure or fire
Structural failure
Crashed on landing
Hit Titanium Fence
I can't think of any others at the moment, but if you do, let me know.

Thanks for the maintenance, Jim!
You could even make it one shorter - 'hit a fence' is part of "crashed on landing" IMHO.
The fences only represent all kinds of deadly traps on unknown ground - like holes -
which could not be simulated. Planes often summersaulted on landing - even on their
own airfields. So the fences just stand for a "trap" we didn't regard - and it was
even a visible one, which we COULD have seen.

Then it might also be nice, if we listed a chart with the ways the aviators died.
But only when we have many more fallen pilots, of course.

I put the Titanium fences in as a joke of course. Pol gets hot under the collar when we mention them!

ps Ok, I've got a medal and clipped out the one I want. How do I put it on this site as an avatar? I notice nobody has avatars so maybe it is not possible.

BTW nobody seems to have flown yesterday at least nobody reported in.

...and you find he deserves that?


No idea, to be honest.


Yep - all flying was cancelled due to bad weather. Along the whole front, it seems.

.

Jim, no avatars or sig block images allowed in this place, which is one of the things I do not like about these forums. Much too sterile and way too many pop-up ads. You can add your medal image to your posts over at CombatAce of course if you wish. Also, thanks for your continued work on the records keeping for this most excellent campaign.

Olham, quite right about the weather along the front right now. Another day of no flights so I am wrapping up the Flanders map for mid-1916 and will be posting it soon.

.

...and you find he deserves that?

No, I remember how funny I found the Titanium fence posts (pun deliberate) . I also ran into one.

Actually I have never understood why we all came here from CombatAce in the first place. I shall go there and repost the above one about the 'Dead' data. It seems silly to have to post something in two places.

Great to hear about the map, Lou - my next pilot (if "Bernhard" should fall) may fly
by the North Sea, with MFJ-1. That is an area which is best suited for learning to fly
after real maps only (LEVEL A), cause the nearby sea will always keep you certain about
where you are, and EVERYone should be able to find their home field - even me.

Jim, yeah, it is sometimes confusing to post things twice, and I also forget regularly.
But it had reasons, and now it is as it is.

Benjamin Bloodworth and his faithful O/G are out of the hospital feeling pretty good, until he finds out his transfer has not been approved, and all flights are cancelled. At least he will have one more day before he has to climb back into that death trap!

All flights are cancelled until Tuesday 17th! Oh well, I'll send the results to Olham who can publish them tomorrow - Sunday.

Yep, next flying only on June 17 - for Flanders South at least.
So we have plenty of time to do, what we would otherwise postpone or forget.

Jim, great, please send them - I'll work the chart out.

Rain Rain go away. 3rd day of the wet stuff. The C.O. had us fall out to act as weight on flat wooden doors being pulled behind a Horse It should smooth out the mud. Someone said that this will leed to a flat flying field when dry. Good for those bumpie take offs wot ?

I thought this guy flew more talented than the others. The green paint job was new to me.

A medal for my efforts

Eleven victories in two sorties - however grand that may have been, MudWasp - it makes me think about additional rules.

What I wanted to create, is a campaign which is all about realistic flying and realistic fighting or withdrawal,
and 11 victories in 2 sorties are not ANYwhere near that. Not your fault, MudWasp.
I'm not sure, what the max. victories were in a single sortie in WW1 - someone with better knowledge may come in here -
but I know that even a "doublette" (two victories in one sortie) was rather rare, even among the aces.

If we would leave this as it is now, the hunting for dozens of victories would start again,
and I am not willing to have this in the DiD Campaign.
We all know that WOFF sometimes allows that to happen, and of course it is not a player's fault if it does.
He may even have a fierce fight, where it's "me or them" - where he must shoot it out, cause they don't let him get away.
But we must find a way then, to get to more realistic numbers.


What I am thinking about is this - we could count per sortie:

1 - 3 victories = 1 victory
4 - 6 victories = 2 victories

and more than 6 victories count as 3 victories - more won't be accepted.

What do you others think about this proposal?

Works for me.

It was do or die. The Sopwiths are also my favorite planes, Strutter, Pup, and Tripe.
At this time of the war my Stutter eats EIIIs, things change quickly though as time advances.

Being in "B" class, perhaps I should reduce regional air activity to light?

Not your fault, MudWasp - we could discuss setting "Regional air activity" to "light",
but then I'd like to hear more flyers' opinions.

I think the main point is, that we come to a result, that appears to look much closer
to the real life events back in that war. And since you may not remain the only flyer
with such a high score, we better all throw our 2 cents together about this.

So, what does everyone think about this dilemma?

I don't think we should take away victories from any pilot. It is interesting historically that the Sopwith 1½ Strutter did not have a terrific history of kills either for the British or the French. It was certainly used more by the French.

If you want to set a max no of victories per sortie I can do that. The only problem is that my stats would not agree with WOFF. Maybe the number of points per victory could reduce with increasing victories. But it all becomes a menace to calculate.

How about 1-5 victories score 5 points each
6-10 victories score 4 points each
11-15 victories score 3 points each
16-20 victories score 2 points each
20 upwards score 1 point

I reckon I could do that somehow.

Or: as Olham says:
"What I am thinking about is this - we could count per sortie:

1 - 3 victories = 1 victory
4 - 6 victories = 2 victories

and more than 6 victories count as 3 victories - more won't be accepted.

What do you others think about this proposal?" (Olham)

No, we can't change the number of official victories but we can muck about with the number of points earned. So to change what you propose above, I could calc

1 victory in ONE sortie = 5 points
second victory = 4 points (9 total)
third victory = 3 points (13 total)
fourth victory = 2 points (15 total)
any more victories in ONE sortie = 1 point for each

So 11 victories in ONE sortie would give 5 + 4 + 3 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 21 points (as opposed to 11 * 5 = 55 at the moment)

We have a while to make up our minds as it is pouring with rain outside

What's that award next to my name? I haven't got or reported any.