PDA

View Full Version : PC Gamer interview.


Dano
02-08-2011, 03:03 PM
http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/02/08/il-2-sturmovik-cliffs-of-dover-interview-we-talk-to-oleg-maddox-and-ilya-shevchenko/

TheSwede
02-08-2011, 03:12 PM
I agree on the preferred sequel. ;)

HFC_Dolphin
02-08-2011, 03:19 PM
WOW, great interview with more information published :)

If Oleg or Ilya are reading I would like to ask about the use of radars.
In reality, the calculation of the height of the planes was not 100% sure and that's why British pilots used to fly at higher altitudes than what ground control told them (and all of this created lots of communications problems).

So, now in Cliffs, are the radars going to give precise information, or is there room for error in estimated altitude of enemies?

Edit: Dano replied to my question, but pointing to the interview, where you state that radars can give mistaken information.

Royraiden
02-08-2011, 03:20 PM
Great!!

Hecke
02-08-2011, 03:20 PM
What? The engine is called Cliffs of dover?

I thought the engine is still called IL-2 Sturmovik.


Then this game must be called. Cliffs of dover - Cliffs of dover, and the next one ... :confused:

Dano
02-08-2011, 03:20 PM
From the interview:

The radar can make mistakes, occasionally misidentify targets, or guide you to a wrong position.

Mods, apologies, just realised I posted this in the wrong place.

HFC_Dolphin
02-08-2011, 03:23 PM
From the interview:



Mods, apologies, just realised I posted this in the wrong place.

Thanks Dano, I missed this part :)

blades96
02-08-2011, 03:25 PM
Only 22 people working on the game!! That is a shock.

Biggs
02-08-2011, 03:31 PM
excellent interview!... I still cant get over how amazing the damage model sounds.

and it looks like the "renegade pilot" bit wasn't a typo, or bad translation.... very interesting.

after reading that, if your still not excited about this sim then there's clearly something wrong with you :lol:

Daniël
02-08-2011, 03:44 PM
after reading that, if your still not excited about this sim then there's clearly something wrong with you :lol:

+1 ;)

Interesting interview! :)

Sven
02-08-2011, 03:48 PM
I agree on the preferred sequel. ;)

I really hope so, that would be a very pleasant surprise if it would become true:)

Blue 5
02-08-2011, 03:49 PM
The paragraph entitiled PCG: I hear there’s romance and renegade pilots in the campaign. Care to go into details?

Seriously, WTF? This was nominally marketed as a flight sim, why has Pearl Harbor suddenly reared its ugly head? Surely the team have better things to do than impliment some soap opera-esque plot :confused:

Dano
02-08-2011, 03:54 PM
The paragraph entitiled PCG: I hear there’s romance and renegade pilots in the campaign. Care to go into details?

Seriously, WTF? This was nominally marketed as a flight sim, why has Pearl Harbor suddenly reared its ugly head? Surely the team have better things to do than impliment some soap opera-esque plot :confused:

Did you actually read the interview, the bit where it explained that these parts are from vet stories during the battle?

Blue 5
02-08-2011, 03:59 PM
Did you actually read the interview, the bit where it explained that these parts are from vet stories during the battle?

Fighter pilots had love interests, sometimes there were tragic stories involved. Some pilots defected to a greater or lesser degree. Both of these elements were so incredibly irrelevant to the wider Battle of Britain that it is untrue. That is has any place in this project is simply breathtakingly bizarre

This is supposed to be a high fidelity simulation. If 1C Maddox want to continue the Wing Commander series, good luck to them :rolleyes:

Dano
02-08-2011, 04:02 PM
Fighter pilots had love interests, sometimes there were tragic stories involved. Some pilots defected to a greater or lesser degree. Both of these elements were so incredibly irrelevant to the wider Battle of Britain that it is untrue. That is has any place in this project is simply breathtakingly bizarre

This is supposed to be a high fidelity simulation. If 1C Maddox want to continue the Wing Commander series, good luck to them :rolleyes:

I see it otherwise, it's a simulation based on the Battle of Britain, thus anything that happened in the battle has a place so long as it involves a plane and/or a pilot.

Edit: So as not to cause confusion with certain members of the forum :rolleyes:

Royraiden
02-08-2011, 04:04 PM
Fighter pilots had love interests, sometimes there were tragic stories involved. Some pilots defected to a greater or lesser degree. Both of these elements were so incredibly irrelevant to the wider Battle of Britain that it is untrue. That is has any place in this project is simply breathtakingly bizarre

This is supposed to be a high fidelity simulation. If 1C Maddox want to continue the Wing Commander series, good luck to them :rolleyes:

The game has not being released.When it does, if you think it is not worth the money then dont buy it.It is as simple as that.

Biggs
02-08-2011, 04:06 PM
Only 22 people working on the game!! That is a shock.

And think about it... between the 22, you have so many different responsibilities: modelers, programmers, animators etc... and I'm sure some shared multiple disciplines making their respective workloads even greater.

Given the amount of detail and precision that they are trying to create, it's a marvel that they are completing it in the timeframe that they have.

hats off to them.

Blue 5
02-08-2011, 04:38 PM
I see it otherwise, it's a simulation based on the Battle of Britain, thus anything that happened in that battle has a place.

Millions of things occurred that summer; you fancy being assigned milking duty or running the NAAFI? :rolleyes:


The game has not being released.When it does, if you think it is not worth the money then dont buy it.It is as simple as that.

I will buy it and I understand the principle of later patches implementing newer functions; what alarms me is the opportunity cost of love interests (which will doubtless be toe-curling) or renegade pilots (can anyone name an RAF pilot who deliberately flew to France during this period?). Dynamic Weather and Campaigns left out, strange RPG plots added. Given the target market, I find that to be of questionable sense.

Wutz
02-08-2011, 05:03 PM
The interview is interesting, but too bad that it looks like we will be heading on forward after CoD and not also covering the Battle of France or the invasion of Poland, as that has never been covered by any flight sim yet. Oh well.

Blue 5
02-08-2011, 05:07 PM
The interview is interesting, but too bad that it looks like we will be heading on forward after CoD and not also covering the Battle of France or the invasion of Poland, as that has never been covered by any flight sim yet. Oh well.

I'm with you, but I've been cheered by the [slow] success of RoF. The dowloadable, pay-for add-on concept seems to have worked. Cross that with the various campaign sets that were available for IL-2 and we might just see some French or Polish campaigns come out. Fingers crossed, anyway :)

Old_Canuck
02-08-2011, 05:37 PM
Oleg and Ilya that was an awesome interview. I have read many of your interviews over the years but in this one you hit the ball out of the park. That story about the pilot who's future wife was sitting behind him while he shot down a bandit made chills go down my spine. Can you imagine what that would have been like for both of them? Thank you very much for sharing that story and I can't wait to play the CoD version of the fighter pilot's romance. :grin:

KG26_Alpha
02-08-2011, 05:47 PM
Personally

I went past the part of the interview as there was a spoiler warning so I have no idea (well some now its been posted here) what to expect.

I look forward to the idea of a couple of interesting story lines in CoD and hope there's a opening for us mission builders to also do this as adding small missions sets with a story (not off line campaigns) and share with the community it was always fun to do.

Mod Hat On

I have deleted some posts in this thread, lets keep it positive please.



.

Ploughman
02-08-2011, 05:49 PM
Great interview, intrigued by the radar comments including the enigmatic "There is even some attempt to simulate antenna pattern." Anyone any ideas what that might mean?
And I quite look forward to going into action with a dame on my lap. They don't have that in Flaming Cliffs. Here, another flight sim with the word Cliffs in the title, is this some kind of conspiracy?

The Kraken
02-08-2011, 05:53 PM
Too bad that these days any disagreement has to end in drama on this forum...

Anyway consider these points:

- a story and event-driven campaign is a great showcase for the capabilities of the mission builder and scripting/trigger functionalities (also important during development)
- such campaigns will be popular with the general audience beyond the flight sim enthusiasts, which have to buy the game as well to make it a financial success. This will also be reflected in reviews which usually point out that flight sims are "too boring" for normal players. Provided it's well done of course.
- if it's not your cup of tea, just use them as training opportunities to get accustomed to the planes - or stick to the QMB if you're too disgusted. By the time you've set up everything and feel comfortable with the planes, HOTAS and engine management you can bet that some more serious campaign are already available for download.

No reason to panic. But maybe I'm just too relaxed for the current state of this forum...

Blue 5
02-08-2011, 06:17 PM
I have deleted some posts in this thread, lets keep it positive please.

So in the name of not being sufficiently 'positive', you deleted the entirely of several of my posts? How pleasant to know that anyone not being 'positive' is no longer allowed to comment, what a nicely nuanced appreciation of people's concerns. What I said was:

It was not immature; it was a discussion based on the opportunity cost of the development of a particular product by a small team. Please see all the other posts full of 'ZOMG' and 'LOL' prior to opining that my reasoned argument about relative value was immature. For goodness, sake I said I'LL BUY IT, I am also entitled to question why a love interests is considered an import part of a fight sim, or am I the only one here that thinks this a tad odd?

That is a relevant and reasonable position.

ckolonko
02-08-2011, 06:39 PM
Looks like the renegade thing is confirmed.

Dano
02-08-2011, 06:54 PM
I have selectively deleted some posts in this thread, lets keep it positive please.

Fixed.

JG4_Helofly
02-08-2011, 07:03 PM
Interesting interview! I can´t wait to see the stall fighters hanging in the air without any manoeuvrability left :)

Juri_JS
02-08-2011, 07:06 PM
I am very disappointed that there will be no dynamic campaign. I really don't understand Oleg's decision. The Battle of Britain would be a perfect scenario for a dynamic campaign and even an old game like Lucasfilm Games "Their Finest Hour: The Battle of Britain" (1989) had one.

DD_crash
02-08-2011, 07:12 PM
I am very disappointed that there will be no dynamic campaign. I really don't understand Oleg's decision. The Battle of Britain would be a perfect scenario for a dynamic campaign and even an old game like Lucasfilm Games "Their Finest Hour: The Battle of Britain" (1989) had one.

I think I read that Oleg said it was taking too long but we will get dynamic campaigns later on. So why panic?

Juri_JS
02-08-2011, 07:24 PM
Quote:
"OLEG: Given the likely shelf-life of the sim, there’s sure to be dynamic campaigns created by third parties, as there was with the original Il-2."

For me that doesn't sound as if Oleg's team will work on a dynamic campaign. I guess he means something like Lowengrins DCG. But maybe I just don't understand it correct.

Richie
02-08-2011, 07:31 PM
I agree on the preferred sequel. ;)

Me too big time. I would love to see a new F4 in North Africa camouflage. Sand blowing behind me as I take off etc. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0PygjC1o88

T}{OR
02-08-2011, 07:33 PM
I agree on the preferred sequel. ;)

Absolutely.

jt_medina
02-08-2011, 07:44 PM
Some highlights


PCG: Mitchell spent less time developing the Spitfire than you’ve spent developing this sim. What have been the most time-consuming elements of the design?

ILYA: Everything! 3D models, the flight model, the damage model, cockpit gauges, artificial intelligence, weather, maps… they’re all responsible for the long development time. We are a very small team (there’s only 22 of us) and we’re doing a huge team’s job. Check the credits for other games, and you’ll often see teams ten times the size working on games less complex than Cliffs of Dover. The general spirit of perfectionism – we’re trying to make the world’s best WWII flight sim – is what’s responsible for the game taking as long as it did.




PCG. What makes Cliffs of Dover’s flight model better than Il-2’s?

ILYA: Simple. The formulas process more variables and are therefore more precise. Il-2 was pretty darn close to the real thing, so the flight model in Cliffs of Dover doesn’t feel drastically new. You will see the most differences at low speeds and in adverse conditions such as stalls and spins. Basically, in Il-2 we calculated simpler physics at fewer points around the aircraft. In Cliffs of Dover, we look at more parameters in more places. In reality this means a codebase that’s many times larger. Our engine model alone is over 20 times the size of that of Il-2.





PCG: I’m bounced by a Bf 109 and my Spitfire takes a few cannon rounds to the wing and engine. What damage may have been caused?

ILYA: Whoa. Lots of things can happen. To put things into perspective, we have over 10 times the number of damageable components that Il-2 had. A wing of a Spitfire has a few dozen things that can be damaged: the wing surface itself, control surfaces and control lines, spars and internal structure, landing gear struts, wheel, locks, and other components, the hydraulic system, brake lines, oil cooler, the flap, flap piston, a pneumatic hose driving it, three machine guns with associated lines, ammo boxes, and so on.

So depending on where your rounds hit, any number of those items could get damaged or destroyed, with expected results. A round could fly right through leaving just two insignificant holes in the skin, it could hit a spar and detach the whole wing, it could detonate the ammo box and destroy the entire plane – or a million other possible combinations.




OLEG: And there’s no difference between flyable and AI aircraft in terms of complexity for damage modelling.



PCG: Will radar installations play any role beyond providing targets for the Luftwaffe?

ILYA: Yes. Radar plays an active role in spotting and tracking enemy planes, and guiding interceptors to them. The radar can make mistakes, occasionally misidentify targets, or guide you to a wrong position. It can also help you navigate back home. When flying for the RAF you’ll be hearing radar operators a lot, and probably even get used to having awesome situational awareness beyond visual range.

OLEG: There is even some attempt to simulate antenna pattern.




I can't wait...

Necrobaron
02-08-2011, 07:47 PM
Interesting interview. I have to admit that I'm still not sure what to make of this love story aspect but I suppose that'll just have to be a "wait and see" thing.

Regarding the dynamic campaign, while Oleg does not mention this in the interview, Ilya has said on these forums that they have (or will have?) a dynamic campaign generator in it's very early stages but it'll be quite some time before they get it up to the standards of the rest of the game (as opposed to simply tacking on something like what the old games had).

Regarding the sequel, yes I would've preferred the Battle of Poland and/or France but the Mediterranean would be pretty interesting too.

Blackdog_kt
02-08-2011, 08:01 PM
Too bad that these days any disagreement has to end in drama on this forum...

Anyway consider these points:

- a story and event-driven campaign is a great showcase for the capabilities of the mission builder and scripting/trigger functionalities (also important during development)
- such campaigns will be popular with the general audience beyond the flight sim enthusiasts, which have to buy the game as well to make it a financial success. This will also be reflected in reviews which usually point out that flight sims are "too boring" for normal players. Provided it's well done of course.
- if it's not your cup of tea, just use them as training opportunities to get accustomed to the planes - or stick to the QMB if you're too disgusted. By the time you've set up everything and feel comfortable with the planes, HOTAS and engine management you can bet that some more serious campaign are already available for download.

No reason to panic. But maybe I'm just too relaxed for the current state of this forum...

I think i'm going to have to agree with this, but then i was around for the initial launch of IL2 back in 2001. It didn't have most of the features we enjoy today in IL2:1946 but that didn't prevent it from becoming a success and growing over the years. That doesn't mean we must settle for incompleteness in our simulators either, there just needs to be a balance.

As long we have enough tools to recreate scenarios from the BoB (flyable aircraft, AI units, mission builder, stock missions to showcase some capabilities, tracking of victory conditions and use of triggered events in online matches) the new sim will see similar levels of success to the original IL2. From where i'm standing, i think it has the tools needed.

Then, as it grows older some of this stuff will be automated to make it easier for us to just focus on flying.
It's just that when time limits force you to choose between getting the basics right or automating them you choose the first option, because you can't include an automation for something that isn't in the game engine. A dynamic campaign generator would be useless if we had only 3 flyables and 5 AI units in total, or aircraft that didn't fly accurately, and so on ;)

KG26_Alpha
02-08-2011, 08:01 PM
Hehe

I remember the vote at UBI for the Med or Pacific theatre.

I think Oleg was disappointed back then the Med didn't get the vote.

Cant wait for the whole lot to load on my hard drive :)

Old_Canuck
02-08-2011, 08:21 PM
Looks like the renegade thing is confirmed.

Indeed and a nice surprise at that. I hope our talented mission builders can come up with similar scenarios. This one's based on reality and that makes it even more compelling in my opinion.

With release date drawing near we're sure to hear more from the malcontents and trolls with hidden agendas. Since the early 2000's it seems to be a tradition around here.

Triggaaar
02-08-2011, 08:41 PM
and it looks like the "renegade pilot" bit wasn't a typo, or bad translation.... very interesting.It had to be didn't it. The alternative was that Oleg had lost his mind, so I was pretty confident it was a mistake.

ckolonko
02-08-2011, 08:43 PM
I cant wait to see how the renegade thing plays out. I'd also like to hear some more about the real story as well. I think this will add a nice bit of variation to the game. As Oleg described it it appears that you can make a choice, thus increasing playability. Cant Wait.

Ploughman
02-08-2011, 08:44 PM
If the Med gets the tick after the Defence of Moscow, which I think is the next add in if I remember from all that Igromir whoo-haaa, I wonder if carrier aviation will get an introduction? Still, first things first.

F19_Klunk
02-08-2011, 08:48 PM
Quote:
"OLEG: Given the likely shelf-life of the sim, there’s sure to be dynamic campaigns created by third parties, as there was with the original Il-2."

For me that doesn't sound as if Oleg's team will work on a dynamic campaign. I guess he means something like Lowengrins DCG. But maybe I just don't understand it correct.

Ilya wrote in another thread about this issue:


There's bits and pieces. We made a decision about 18 months ago that we wouldn't be able to make it right, and we'd rather build good static campaigns instead. So it's been on a backburner for some time.

I'm the guy who wrote a bunch of giant 100-page design docs for the dynamic campaign, so it was a very hard decision for me personally.

There's probably at least a year of work left on it to make it great. We could have make something like an Il-2 level dynamic campaign in a few months, but I don't want to do that at all. I want it to be ground-breaking and worthy of the rest of the game.

I understand the dissapointment for some offliners, but considering the small development team and estimated time for deveoping this, I think they made the right decision: focus on the actual engine, FM , etc etc.. otherwise this title would be deleyed even more...and as someone said.. mission makers will throw themselves at this in a rush.. there will be plenty of downloadable missions and let's just se what happens with the dynamic issue after the release.


regarding the sequel... I guessed Med but wished Pacific. Makes sense though to make a seq with re-usable planeset..makes ETA shorter ;)

Les
02-08-2011, 08:50 PM
Great interview, intrigued by the radar comments including the enigmatic "There is even some attempt to simulate antenna pattern." Anyone any ideas what that might mean?...

I could be wrong, but I took it to mean they've tried to make the radar effective only in those areas that it actually covered. Someone posted a picture of a map somewhere in the forums here that showed the fan-like spread of each radar station and how they overlapped, or didn't. The coverage of the channnel wasn't complete, with a series of stations beaming further out from certain points, while another series covered areas closer to home. Sounds like they've tried to limit the radars effectiveness in a more historically accurate way than just giving everything everywhere blanket coverage. I'm just guessing that's what they meant though.

T}{OR
02-08-2011, 09:35 PM
If the Med gets the tick after the Defence of Moscow, which I think is the next add in if I remember from all that Igromir whoo-haaa, I wonder if carrier aviation will get an introduction? Still, first things first.


IIRC Battle of Moscow was the third in line title announced. ;)

Dano
02-08-2011, 09:45 PM
Edit: Arguing the point with somebody who appears to be arguing for reason yet is unwilling to see any side but there own is ridiculous.

Biggs
02-08-2011, 09:56 PM
Edit: Arguing the point with somebody who appears to be arguing for reason yet is unwilling to see any side but there own is ridiculous.

isn't that just the definition of an 'internet discussion'?

;)

Dano
02-08-2011, 10:03 PM
isn't that just the definition of an 'internet discussion'?

;)

Yes, but I just keep getting dragged in lol!

Chivas
02-08-2011, 10:14 PM
There could have been a couple of renegade pilots in the second world war, but that information would have been kept very quiet. So what if one mission has a girl in it, big deal, skip the mission if it offends so much.

The Battle of Moscow is a third party addon.
Korea is a relative third party addon being done by Luthier.

I'm glad Oleg's next project appears to be still somewhere in the Mediterranean, probably a relatively small map like Malta/ Sicily. This should be easy to develop with the game engine done, and most aircraft already done, which would give the team a quick influx of cash before developing the more demanding larger theaters.

ATAG_Bliss
02-08-2011, 10:43 PM
Blue 5,

Based on the interview, this part of the sim is based on a historical account of a WWII pilot. I think that just goes to show how much research this team has put forth into making the sim. I think it's a wonderful idea, even enough so, that I may actually play SP, which I never do.

I don't get why this puts a frown on your face? Heck, I think it's awesome lol. There's obviously gonna be plenty of "flying the planes" in this sim. What are you worried about?

Blue 5
02-08-2011, 10:47 PM
Bliss,

like I said, it was an issue of priorities not a criticism of the game in its entirely. However, the mods appear to have deleted my last 2 posts in addition to the ones from earlier today removed for not being 'positive' so clearly we are not allowed to discuss this or cast any aspersions on the game. Frankly, if the moderation on this forum so unashamedly partisan I can't see the point in bothering to remain a member.

Bye all.

Les
02-08-2011, 10:48 PM
...Just 1 thing I do not really understand as a non-native English speaker, what is a 'renegade' pilot where they talk about in the interview?

A traitor. Someone on your own side who is fighting for the enemy.

It seems, as part of the Allied campaign, you will have to deal with a fellow pilot who is somehow found to be betraying your side.

The idea sounds crazy at first, but depending on how it's done, it could be believable. It needn't be some lunatic trying to shoot you down and then making a run for the safety of enemy territory. There are, potentially, lots of ways someone sympathizing with the enemy could have sabotaged or hindered operations in the field. Will be interesting to see what they make of it, and if any more details from the real-life events that were supposed to have inspired it come forward.

easytarget3
02-08-2011, 11:04 PM
the trailer in the interview looks amazing!!!!

easytarget3
02-08-2011, 11:10 PM
A traitor. Someone on your own side who is fighting for the enemy.

It seems, as part of the Allied campaign, you will have to deal with a fellow pilot who is somehow found to be betraying your side.

The idea sounds crazy at first, but depending on how it's done, it could be believable. It needn't be some lunatic trying to shoot you down and then making a run for the safety of enemy territory. There are, potentially, lots of ways someone sympathizing with the enemy could have sabotaged or hindered operations in the field. Will be interesting to see what they make of it, and if any more details from the real-life events that were supposed to have inspired it come forward.

what i understood from the interview it could be sort of personal hate or conflict between pilots, or maybe sympathizing with the enemy like you wrote, anyway it will be interesting angle to look at the airwar.;)

Sven
02-08-2011, 11:12 PM
A traitor. Someone on your own side who is fighting for the enemy.

It seems, as part of the Allied campaign, you will have to deal with a fellow pilot who is somehow found to be betraying your side.

The idea sounds crazy at first, but depending on how it's done, it could be believable. It needn't be some lunatic trying to shoot you down and then making a run for the safety of enemy territory. There are, potentially, lots of ways someone sympathizing with the enemy could have sabotaged or hindered operations in the field. Will be interesting to see what they make of it, and if any more details from the real-life events that were supposed to have inspired it come forward.

Thanks you for that! I used to read Biggles comic books when I was younger and I remember one instance where a hurricane was actually flown by a German pilot , he flew his captured aircraft among the English ones in combat and shot a couple down and then backed off, of course this comic is fictive, but I think it's based on true experiences/actions/reports from pilots. Eventually he became too suspicious and they shot him down though;)

Avimimus
02-08-2011, 11:12 PM
Only 22 people working on the game!! That is a shock.

Yes, his team has increased in size in the past couple of years (I think there were 10-15% less members)

ElAurens
02-08-2011, 11:29 PM
The Med.

http://rpmedia.ask.com/ts?u=/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c1/TR_000978_kittyhawk.jpg/180px-TR_000978_kittyhawk.jpg

I'm a happy camper.

TacKY
02-08-2011, 11:47 PM
Still disappointed about the dynamic campaign and it seems that by the interview there wont be one.

Blackdog_kt
02-09-2011, 12:06 AM
Let's get things straight so no more people panic :grin:

A lot of time there's a communication/language barrier between fans and developers and that's where all this commotion usually starts.

If you piece two and two together, the eyebrow-raising aspects are becoming not only manageable to accept but actually interesting ;)

What do i mean? Well, it's dead simple. Both the renegade pilot AND the romance mission are a case of one-off plot devices during a carefully orchestrated scripted campaign, not something we can expect to happen every second or third mission and ruin the complete feel and context of the sim.

It's just like flying a user made campaign for IL2 by one of the talented community members who spend their time to give us more enjoyment out of a 10 year old game: you might start a mission and in the briefing he'll be hinting at something possibly weird that could happen, then you see an enemy aircraft that wishes to defect to your side.

In IL2, this was handled by making that aircraft part of the player's team in the mission builder while still giving it a skin of the opposing team and the guy making the mission would have to include spoilers in the briefing.

Maybe in CoD's mission builder there are various triggers that enable us to do something similar in a different way that doesn't need briefing spoilers and we can maintain the player's suspense: just think of getting a mission to intercept a lone target, you close in and see a BF-110 but as you are getting in firing position he makes no effort to evade and the rear gunner position isn't tracking you but instead drops gear, flaps, turns on the lights and calls you on the radio: "This is Rudolf Hess and i wish to defect to the UK" ;)

In contrast to this, to make such a mission in IL2 you would have to spoil everything by putting an asterisk in the briefing and telling the player "don't shoot the lone 110, but escort it to its landing spot...killing the 110 will fail the mission".

Well, maybe in CoD we will be able to craft more creative storylines for our scripted campaigns and still maintain some "secrecy" so that the player is actually surprised when flying them, the inclusion of these two incidents in the stock campaign being meant as a demo of such capability?

If you view it this way there's nothing negative about it at all.

If in the future we are flying a dynamic campaign and every other mission our wingmen start shooting each other while our no.2 breaks formation for neutral Switzerland while winking at you and shouting "look mommy, no hands!" on the radio, the aircraft executing a break turn seemingly on its own and then you see a hottie on his control column is the one actually flying the plane in "strange" new ways then yes, there would be a problem:-P

But from the looks of it, the current situation is more like this: "Hey guys, instead of just missions you can now actually create storylines with plot twists for your scripted, user made campaigns thanks to some new features in the mission builder, here's a small sample".
Well, there's nothing wrong with that.


So how about some rampant speculation on how they'll fit this into the storyline? ;)
I expect that the renegade pilot will not be so much a sympathizer of the enemy, but maybe a guy with whom your character in the script will be having some kind of rivalry.

You know, it starts off almost as a friendly rivalry even though there's a clear "there's something i don't like about this guy" feeling, but it doesn't instantly materialize.
Then you gradually start taking verbal jabs at each other, which leads to competing over your number of kills, etc, small things that an arrogant 20 year old flying some of the best fighters of the time in combat would definitely be prone to.

Perhaps the new briefing interface will be versatile enough to add customized content instead of just text. For example, having a separate tab on the top that opens pages of text and images that look like a personal diary/log, something to browse before reading the actual mission brief, telling you what happened on the base between your last mission and the current one, followed by a similar debriefing screen after you land that's again separated into a mission specific part and the storyline part.
Who knows really? All i know is i remember Oleg Maddox saying that Luthier was making some crazy stuff with the briefing interface to make things more immersive and give us the ability to create better missions and campaigns, so i'm just going from there.

Also, i think even in IL2 it was possible to make branching missions in static campaigns depending on the outcome of the previous one, so maybe if you are worse than him nothing happens but if you do better he's actually quite irritated.

From that point on, it could lead to cases of escalating hostility over day to day occurrences (one guy blaming the other for the loss of a wingman, the stealing of a kill, etc), resulting in a scuffle in the officer's pub and so on...

Until one day, you are flying a patrol with him in your group. Tensions are high even though strict radio discipline is maintained. You receive vectors for an incoming raid and position your flight accordingly.
Just after the first head-on pass and resulting melee, you become separated after being bounced by a lone 109 with some alarming tail markings...

Just as you are dealing with this pesky and very good German pilot, your little psychopath of a rival decides it's the best time to turn on you and finish you off for good.
Can you overcome the new, dynamic AI's inexperience to save yourself? The rest of your flight is still engaging the bombers and you've become separated, will they be able to find you and come to your aid? Or will you have to face both the German ace and the renegade on your own?
Think like Iceman vs Maverick, but in 1940 and it ends with them killing each other :-P

Actually, it might be fun to start a new thread where we'll each give our own guess on how it will play out and take bets on it :grin:

speculum jockey
02-09-2011, 12:40 AM
I think a lot of the backlash against the mission with the girl is that a lot of the posters here are afraid they might have to talk to her. A game that you've been waiting for v.s. interacting with a member of the opposite sex. . . quite the dilemma.

Royraiden
02-09-2011, 12:46 AM
The Med.

http://rpmedia.ask.com/ts?u=/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c1/TR_000978_kittyhawk.jpg/180px-TR_000978_kittyhawk.jpg

I'm a happy camper.

1+

lbuchele
02-09-2011, 01:41 AM
Well,I think your post was brilliant, Blackdog_kt .
I agree 100% with your message to the community: "keep your mind open!"

Skoshi Tiger
02-09-2011, 02:41 AM
It will be interesting to see how having a passenger on your lap is going to be portrayed in the sim.

There are a lot of RL stories about pilots having to double-up in tight situations. Here goes some quotes from a book "The Spitfire, Mustang and Kittyhawk in Australian Service" by Stewart Wilson

""Waddy's (John Waddy 15.5 confirmed kills) achieved some fame over an incident which well illustrates that determination.During a ground strafing attack, he found his Kittyhawks engine badly badly overheating. Giving him no alternative but to make a forced landing behind enemy lines. It apeared a long walk home was in front of him, but the approach of three enemy trucks made him have a go at restarting his engine.

Supprisingly , it did and Waddy was able to takeoff and fly at a very low altitude and airspeed for about half an hour before the Alison once again began dangerously overheating. So once more the Kittyhawk was put down, but this time Waddy deliberately allowed enough time for it to cool down before restarting it again and once more taking off. He nursed the aircraft and its red hot engine back to base, just making it before the Allison finally called it quits and sized."

"The flamboyant Gibbes (Bobby Gibbes CO of 3 Squadron 10.25 Kills) carved his own bit of immortality by indulging in one of the more spectacular examples of what was called "double dinking'. This was when a pilot landed his single seat fighter on the desert in order to pick up one of his downed comp[anions. With the rescued pilot sitting on his rescuer's lap and one of them operating the rudder pedals and the other the throttle and stick, many a pilot was saved from becomming a prisoner of war by this method.
Gibbes' rescue came about during a straffing mission on an enemy airfield when one of his pilots was hit by flack and had to belly land on the edge of the field. With his other pilots flying cover, Gibbes landed his P-40 on the enemy airfield- while under intense fire - picked up his passenger and pee'd pff quick!"

"Another 3 Squadron puulled off a probably enven more daring 'double dink' when he landed under intense artillery fire to rescue a stranded Major"

All would make interesting missions in the correct setting.

Cheers!

Avimimus
02-09-2011, 03:12 AM
Still disappointed about the dynamic campaign and it seems that by the interview there wont be one.

In the initial release - just like Il-2.

We'll have our DCG and DGEN, our SEOW and something else - it'll just take time.

Les
02-09-2011, 03:54 AM
Just thought I'd add, one dictionary definition of 'renegade' is - 'person who deserts a cause.'

Lots of possible storylines in that sentence alone. It doesn't necessarily mean joining the opposition.

In any case, I agree it will be interesting to see what 's been done and what can be done with the new options being made available.

WTE_Galway
02-09-2011, 04:21 AM
Thanks you for that! I used to read Biggles comic books when I was younger and I remember one instance where a hurricane was actually flown by a German pilot , he flew his captured aircraft among the English ones in combat and shot a couple down and then backed off, of course this comic is fictive, but I think it's based on true experiences/actions/reports from pilots. Eventually he became too suspicious and they shot him down though;)

On August 11, 1943, an Italian captured P-38 flown by Angelo Tondi shot down B-17F 42-30307 “Bonnie Sue” (97th BG, 414th BS).

http://www.combatreform.org/Image329.jpg

David603
02-09-2011, 04:34 AM
On August 11, 1943, an Italian captured P-38 flown by Angelo Tondi shot down B-17F 42-30307 “Bonnie Sue” (97th BG, 414th BS).

http://www.combatreform.org/Image329.jpg
He must have been just as worried about being shot down by his own side as the enemy, considering how distinctive the Lightning's appearance is ;)

TheSwede
02-09-2011, 07:13 AM
Ilya wrote in another thread about this issue:


There's bits and pieces. We made a decision about 18 months ago that we wouldn't be able to make it right, and we'd rather build good static campaigns instead. So it's been on a backburner for some time.

I'm the guy who wrote a bunch of giant 100-page design docs for the dynamic campaign, so it was a very hard decision for me personally.

There's probably at least a year of work left on it to make it great. We could have make something like an Il-2 level dynamic campaign in a few months, but I don't want to do that at all. I want it to be ground-breaking and worthy of the rest of the game.

I understand the dissapointment for some offliners, but considering the small development team and estimated time for deveoping this, I think they made the right decision: focus on the actual engine, FM , etc etc.. otherwise this title would be deleyed even more...and as someone said.. mission makers will throw themselves at this in a rush.. there will be plenty of downloadable missions and let's just se what happens with the dynamic issue after the release.


regarding the sequel... I guessed Med but wished Pacific. Makes sense though to make a seq with re-usable planeset..makes ETA shorter ;)

+1

And remember Klunk, if we do get the Med there is a high probability that the B-25 is in there. Think of the SvAF Big Wing reenacted with a new high fidelity B25 over North Africa. ;)

Will probably have to leave work for a month or two!

Wutz
02-09-2011, 07:32 AM
I wonder with the renagade Spits thing, does that mean blue gets these?
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m290/RSS-Martin/Flugzeuge/spit_color.jpg:grin:

Tvrdi
02-09-2011, 10:23 AM
thanks for this interview

1.JaVA_Sharp
02-09-2011, 11:30 AM
what i understood from the interview it could be sort of personal hate or conflict between pilots, or maybe sympathizing with the enemy like you wrote, anyway it will be interesting angle to look at the airwar.;)

I think you'll rather see something to the effect that you and your wingman are engaged by 109s (from above afcourse) and a 109 gets on your tail and your wingman refuses to shoot him of!

Sauf
02-09-2011, 12:23 PM
no no no no, you all have it wrong! I have worked out who the traitor is.....

His name is Boulton...Paul Boulton :)

ckolonko
02-09-2011, 12:39 PM
Wow! Thats very Defiant of him!

I/ZG52_Gaga
02-09-2011, 01:57 PM
excuse me this maybe off topic, but i never understood this ... and it is not mentioned in this interview ...

when the next title is out ... we will be using HL or something else?

is there a post concerning that matter?

KG26_Alpha
02-09-2011, 03:01 PM
Hi Gaga

Pure assumption

Due to "online content" the publisher is the one usually responsible.

Legally though permission would be needed I would think for HL to allow CoD users "online content" access through the software.

Past experience with IL2 series showed the UBI servers were not up to the job and everyone used the Hyperlobby instead.

There was I would imagine an agreement with Oleg and Jiri, (but not sure about UBI) to allow the Hyperlobby exclusive use as the servers at UBI died off.
Also
There was talk of a online war for CoD with players stats etc recorded in a world wide database as a Pay to Play campaign, this was sometime ago and I'm not sure if this is still a viable offering in SoW.






.

Troll2k
02-09-2011, 03:24 PM
Besides HyperLobby there used to be others.All Seeing Eye,X-fire,Gamespy Arcade.These all were lobbies of sorts.I think only X-fire survives.

ASE(All Seeing Eye) had better sorting and details about the current maps being used by the server.Also a more accurate player count and location of the server.But there was not a chat.Much harder to set up a coop.

Gamespy Arcade to me was a pain.

X-fire was ok but lacked the 'friendliness" of HyperLobby.

In the early days of IL2,on the multiplayer screen,there used to be a "play at Ubi.com) button.

As mentioned by KG26_Alpha their servers at the time were not up to it.For that matter their website was a loading disaster.They had trouble keeping the website going let alone servers.

I am not sure if Ubisoft wants to tackle that problem again.

I think I saw somewhere(I can not back this up) that the game would have an ingame browser.(Like ROF)

Whether or not COD will work with HyperLobby Jiri will not know until he gets a copy.Some games that have been requested to get rooms on HyperLobby will just not work.

I/ZG52_Gaga
02-09-2011, 03:26 PM
Hi Gaga

There was talk of a online war for CoD with players stats etc recorded in a world wide database as a Pay to Play campaign, this was sometime ago and I'm not sure if this is still a viable offering in SoW.

Pay to Play is out of the question if you ask me :)

Sturm_Williger
02-09-2011, 04:13 PM
The Med.

http://rpmedia.ask.com/ts?u=/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c1/TR_000978_kittyhawk.jpg/180px-TR_000978_kittyhawk.jpg

I'm a happy camper.

Agree, if they do move to the Med as (one of) the first expansions, I too will be very happy.
I've never been wild about Spitfires, but I've always liked the P40, so would look forward to this a lot.

Jaws2002
02-09-2011, 05:39 PM
The "renegade pilots" idea is cool. Think of "The hurt locker".
In every armies there are commanders hated by many people in their unit for a reason or another.
I'm not reffering here at "The hurt locker", but There are asholes everywhere, and in the army if they have superior rank, this is really bad news for a lot of people.
I punched my sergeant flat on his back the first time I had a chance and i knew he won't rat about it. The a$hole jumped the fence and went in town to get few drinks. I was "Legally OFF DUTY". :-) He had to keep his mouth shut. I never again had to do two guard shifts every night, while the average was two shifts a week and run around the platoon for the seven kilometer march to the training grounds every day.:roll:
There were also many deserters that were hunted and shot down during the war.
This kind of tense relations are common in every army and is not a bad idea to have it in the game.

The Kraken
02-09-2011, 05:56 PM
I think I see somewhere(I can not back this up) that the game would have an ingame browser.(Like ROF)

Whether or not COD will work with HyperLobby Jiri will not know until he gets a copy.Some games that have been requested to get rooms on HyperLobby will just not work.

The truth is out there...

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=190275&postcount=317

Il2Pongo
02-09-2011, 06:42 PM
Last year, the year before? The devs asked for wild events that took place during the battle that would make you say wow.
Well, they have implemented two in the game.

Great little write up.
CANNOT WAIT FOR THE GAME!

JG53Frankyboy
02-09-2011, 07:35 PM
The truth is out there...

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=190275&postcount=317

having the first years of IL2 UBI com online play in mind (i personally was never there :D ), i guess we will still use the Hyperlobby for some more years :)

JG52Uther
02-09-2011, 09:40 PM
Hyperlobby is so easy to use I hope it is still an option.

ElAurens
02-09-2011, 10:10 PM
+1

Hyperlobby essentially saved the online aspect of IL2.

I remember flying with the old UBI interface. Or rather not flying much with it...

It was horrible.

KG26_Alpha
02-10-2011, 08:25 PM
Well Hyperlobby has been "free" to use for over 10 years, so don't forget to use the donate button in the middle of the HL screen :)

It will be interesting to see some online gui screen-shots, it would give a clue to the hosting format a little more.



.

dcal
02-11-2011, 12:40 PM
I think I read that Oleg said it was taking too long but we will get dynamic campaigns later on. So why panic?

Agreed - this game will be much more mod friendly than IL2 so I am sure we will see this and many other things from the community. I am glad they are getting the game out now instead of spending more time to do dynamic campaign(although I want it).

I play Arma 2 military sim, which is very mod friendly, and you should see all the really cool addons, missions, dynamic campaigns that have been made for that game. It is like 100 games in one. My hope is COD will be supported by the community in the same way.:grin:

Doogerie
02-11-2011, 12:44 PM
nice interview I don't mind there being a story and I have to say it's a lovely story.

Osprey
02-11-2011, 02:32 PM
So in the name of not being sufficiently 'positive', you deleted the entirely of several of my posts? How pleasant to know that anyone not being 'positive' is no longer allowed to comment, what a nicely nuanced appreciation of people's concerns. What I said was:

It was not immature; it was a discussion based on the opportunity cost of the development of a particular product by a small team. Please see all the other posts full of 'ZOMG' and 'LOL' prior to opining that my reasoned argument about relative value was immature. For goodness, sake I said I'LL BUY IT, I am also entitled to question why a love interests is considered an import part of a fight sim, or am I the only one here that thinks this a tad odd?

That is a relevant and reasonable position.

I completely agree. It is up to the team what they put in it but I'm definitely not interested in a sideshow like that either. It's a small team, I would much rather have seen effort put into something else instead.
The good news for me in the interview is that Ilya commented that you can jump into other aircraft on the fly in MP modes - why is this significant? Well, it means that there is a Moving Dogfight Server ability!! :D

Osprey
02-11-2011, 02:44 PM
Originally Posted by Sven
...Just 1 thing I do not really understand as a non-native English speaker, what is a 'renegade' pilot where they talk about in the interview?

A traitor. Someone on your own side who is fighting for the enemy.

It seems, as part of the Allied campaign, you will have to deal with a fellow pilot who is somehow found to be betraying your side.


It doesn't mean that at all!! Somebody called a renegade is not a traitor, it is just somebody who you have no control over and operates on their own agenda. A renegade is usually somebody who just disobeys orders - they were useful in a way, there were lots of RAF pilots who wanted to get at the Germans so much that they would break formation and fly off on the hunt on their own despite being told not to.

zakkandrachoff
02-11-2011, 04:07 PM
PCG: Where next for the Cliffs of Dover engine? The Med? The Eastern Front? Korea?

OLEG: I can’t tell you the exact area or name of the title yet (market factors will have a say) but I personally prefer the Med.
.

and the presentation of Battle For Moscow? i was waiting for fly Bf109F

Med? Mediterraneo?what time and what place? MALTA 1941-1942? Tunez? Sicily? i wanna know!
I believe is more best East, Med have similar aircraft that Cliffs Of Dover.
For some geography and aircraft Different, Finnish Conflict 1941 will be great. Or East conflict. Or Flying Tigers maybe. or Sino Japanesse conflicts prewar.
but Med is okay, anything of il2 is OK for me;):rolleyes::-)

Les
02-12-2011, 10:18 PM
It doesn't mean that at all!! Somebody called a renegade is not a traitor, it is just somebody who you have no control over and operates on their own agenda. A renegade is usually somebody who just disobeys orders - they were useful in a way, there were lots of RAF pilots who wanted to get at the Germans so much that they would break formation and fly off on the hunt on their own despite being told not to.

My definition of a traitor is a person guilty of treason or treachery, someone who is disloyal, unreliable or dangerous. Someone who disobeys orders and betrays their sovereign or country.

And in my opinion, an Allied pilot going renegade during the Battle of Britain, in the way it's been described in the interview, that is, to the point where they can be considered an enemy comparable to the Germans, could be considered such a traitor.

However, amongst all the speculation here, I said what you and others also said, that it could just be some interpersonal rivalry or personality clash or something getting out of hand.

Quoted from my second post - "Just thought I'd add, one dictionary definition of 'renegade' is - 'person who deserts a cause.' Lots of possible storylines in that sentence alone. It doesn't necessarily mean joining the opposition..."

There are lots of ways to desert a cause, including putting your personal or interpersonal issues before everything else.

I doubt they will make your squadmate 'enemy' an outright turncoat or German sympathizer. But I don't think they're just talking about characters arguing over how to engage the enemy either.

Quoted from the interview - "...In the game however you will experience exactly what the veteran experienced: unexpected hostility from your own squadmate, growing conflict between you, and finally having to make a choice in the air between two enemies, one of them painted in your own colours..."

That 'choice' sounds like which one you engage in combat. That means, in the context of a war, if you're fighting a squadmate, then you're fighting a traitor, or you are one.

I hope this all makes sense, whether you agree with it or not.

Anyway, it's all just speculation and hypothetical nonsense to me, until we get more information. Then it becomes a more straightforward form of entertainment. :grin: In any case, it's not something to take too seriously. Sorry if I caused any confusion or led anyone astray while thinking out loud here.

zauii
02-13-2011, 09:44 AM
Disobeying orders is obviously a big issue but to compare someone that disobeys orders with the Germans is just wrong(as long as their not shooting friendlies).
Ground them or remove them from the army or even throw them in jail for awhile but to kill them or sentence them to death would just be a murder committed by society.

swiss
02-13-2011, 10:19 AM
Disobeying orders is obviously a big issue but to compare someone that disobeys orders with the Germans is just wrong(as long as their not shooting friendlies).
Ground them or remove them from the army or even throw them in jail for awhile but to kill them or sentence them to death would just be a murder committed by society.

If they refuse to obey the order in the battlefield I'll shot them myself - without trial, on the spot.

That's why officers are equipped with sidearms.

Vevster
02-13-2011, 04:17 PM
If they refuse to obey the order in the battlefield I'll shot them myself - without trial, on the spot.



So you would have shot P/O Paszkiewitz who shot down a german plane during a training mission, thus disobeying orders from his British officer?

JAMF
02-13-2011, 04:36 PM
What if the renegade pilot is from the Luftwaffe, being chased by his former squadmate(s). As an allied pilot, how do you know he's friendly? Will the attacking pilot(s) turn back and the renegade waggle his wings? Was the pilot a double agent or a spy stealing a new aircraft?

swiss
02-13-2011, 05:15 PM
So you would have shot P/O Paszkiewitz who shot down a german plane during a training mission, thus disobeying orders from his British officer?

Court-martialed, for sure.
Shooting on the spot is for ground crews only(kinda hard shooting a pilot in plane several hundred yards away, no?).
Obeying orders is probably the most important skill for a pilots - you don't have to think and you're not aloud to have any emotions.

F.i. you lose a wingman, ground control orders you to retreat but instead you decide to revenge your buddy and shoot down the enemy plane.
In Switzerland they would credit you the kill and right after that revoke your flying status. Simple as that.

GnigruH
02-15-2011, 05:06 PM
Court-martialed, for sure.
Shooting on the spot is for ground crews only(kinda hard shooting a pilot in plane several hundred yards away, no?).
Obeying orders is probably the most important skill for a pilots - you don't have to think and you're not aloud to have any emotions.

F.i. you lose a wingman, ground control orders you to retreat but instead you decide to revenge your buddy and shoot down the enemy plane.
In Switzerland they would credit you the kill and right after that revoke your flying status. Simple as that.

An exaggeration. Pilots of polish squadrons would have 50% less aircrafts shot down on their account during bob if they were acting like they were told to ;)

swiss
02-15-2011, 05:16 PM
And yet the Brits still let them fly.
That only shows how desperate they were. :cool:

Vevster
02-15-2011, 06:47 PM
Court-martialed, for sure.
Shooting on the spot is for ground crews only(kinda hard shooting a pilot in plane several hundred yards away, no?).
Obeying orders is probably the most important skill for a pilots - you don't have to think and you're not aloud to have any emotions.
.

OK, you went from "I'll shot them myself - without trial, on the spot" - quite stupid, imo - to, "court-martial" - reasonable, while debatable

Quite a leap

I understand your first statement was just a big-mouth overreaction.

swiss
02-15-2011, 07:17 PM
I understand your first statement was just a big-mouth overreaction.

No, actually it's the only thing you can do on the (infantry) battlefield.
But if you prefer to discuss it out or risk mutiny, do whatever you think is best.
Don't forget to tell the enemy to hold their fire till you're done.

Have you ever served?

GnigruH
02-15-2011, 07:19 PM
And yet the Brits still let them fly.
That only shows how desperate they were. :cool:

Sending 18 year olds with only few hours of basic training into battle is a sign of desperation.
Letting foreign experienced veterans fly hurricanes is not. It's opportunism.

Avimimus
02-15-2011, 08:00 PM
Our armed forces can't execute soldiers (with or without trial). The only situation where this would be possible (as I understand it) would be if the soldier were actively fighting for the enemy forces (ie. not just a traitor, but a traitor currently engaged in active combat).

speculum jockey
02-15-2011, 08:48 PM
Our armed forces can't execute soldiers (with or without trial). The only situation where this would be possible (as I understand it) would be if the soldier were actively fighting for the enemy forces (ie. not just a traitor, but a traitor currently engaged in active combat).

Also the RAF/Luftwaffe never employed commisars.

1.JaVA_Sharp
02-15-2011, 09:12 PM
that's not quite true, Speculum Jockey. Part 2 of the JG26 war diary mentions an officer similar to that being assigned to the Geschwader near the end of war...



And during the Battle the RAF had something far worse then a Commisar available:

A file stamp called LMF, Lack of Moral Fibre.

DefiantMk1
02-16-2011, 03:14 AM
Med campaign, November 1940...Taranto:

http://militaryhistory.about.com/od/worldwari1/p/taranto.htm

I can well imagine flying a "Stringbag" against ships...

Not only that, but Operation Tidal Wave with B-24's against Ploesti oil refineries:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Tidal_Wave

Ok, I might wake up someday....:)

WTE_Galway
02-17-2011, 12:22 AM
Sending 18 year olds with only few hours of basic training into battle is a sign of desperation.
Letting foreign experienced veterans fly hurricanes is not. It's opportunism.

Actually the RAF never sent pilots into combat with only a few hours basic training. The myth that pilots were thrown into Spitfires and Hurricanes with only 10 hours flying time total is ludicrous.

What did happen during the BoB was some pilots only had a few hours on "type". Hence they may have only spent 10 hours in a Spitfire before being assigned an operational unit BUT they still had extensive basic training in trainer aircraft and then aircraft like Gladiators at training squadrons.

The basic training in Gladiators was not just a result of a shortage of Spitfires and Hurricanes. the RAF found that pilots trained in Gladiators were actually more competent than pilots trained in Spitfires as the Spitfire was easier to fly.

GnigruH
02-17-2011, 02:03 PM
Actually, first part of this statement is not about RAF.

winny
02-17-2011, 02:51 PM
And yet the Brits still let them fly.
That only shows how desperate they were. :cool:

Still let them fly? That's a bit patronising to the higest scoring squadron in the BoB. What's cool about that?

swiss
02-17-2011, 03:14 PM
Still let them fly? That's a bit patronising to the higest scoring squadron in the BoB. What's cool about that?

Gosh.

1. they didn't now how they will perform when they first gave them planes
And:
I doesn't really matter because it was a nation joke.

GnigruH
02-17-2011, 03:16 PM
I haven't posted here a lot, but I already identified some 'sources of a blind axis fanboism'. I think that's the case we have here ;-)

It was not only the best scoring sqadron during bob.
It was the only one from the top which flew hurricanes, not spitfires.
It also joined the battle about a month after it had began.

Trying to deny it is just going to look silly and immature.



Anyway...
Not only that, but Operation Tidal Wave with B-24's against Ploesti oil refineries:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Tidal_Wave

Ok, I might wake up someday....


Well, I dont know what is so special about this operation, except that it was a huge allied fail.
For some it might be enough, but to me it's just a bunch of unescorted bombers coming in, dropping bombs and getting away.
With some fighters trying to intercept them. What is so special about it? You can set this up already.
Besides nobody will make a map that huge anyway ;-)

Sorry for bursting your bubble ;-)

winny
02-17-2011, 03:47 PM
Gosh.

1. they didn't now how they will perform when they first gave them planes
And:
I doesn't really matter because it was a nation joke.


Ah in that case I see.. Wasn't funny. (and what happened to point number 2?)

And is 'I doesn't really matter...' a freudian slip?

Krt_Bong
02-17-2011, 07:49 PM
Thanks you for that! I used to read Biggles comic books when I was younger and I remember one instance where a hurricane was actually flown by a German pilot , he flew his captured aircraft among the English ones in combat and shot a couple down and then backed off, of course this comic is fictive, but I think it's based on true experiences/actions/reports from pilots. Eventually he became too suspicious and they shot him down though;)

There is a true story of an Italian pilot who in a captured P-38 would call out to stragglers from a bomber mission as a "little friend" to fly with them home and after getting close enough would shoot them down. Eventually a trap was set for him with a specially outfited B-17 and he was shot down, apparently they knew enough about him to name the bomber after his girlfriend and when he flew alongside and inquired about the name the Pilot in fact described his girlfriend and lured him in..

(found the story)

In 1943 a P-38 ran out of fuel and ditched outside Sardinia. The pilot was overwhelmed by locals before he could use his pistol to ignite the tanks and burn the craft. Rossi had the clever idea of using the captured P-38 to kill wounded B-17's returning from bombing missions as stragglers. He bagged several bombers this way. One B-17 Pilot, Lt. Harold Fisher survived an attack, and had trouble convincing others that he was shot down by a 'friendly'.

Fisher was persistent and obtained command of a prototype YB-40 gunship, and flew several missions lagging behind the rest of the bombers trying to lure out the 'Phantom' P-38. As intelligence was gathered in Italy, they discovered Rossi and his captured '38 did indeed exist and had a wife in Constantine. Allies occupied this city, so when the nose art was applied to the YB-40, the artist used a photo of Rossi's wife, and named the gunship after her, 'Gina'.

Fisher flew a mission on August 31st that year, and was actually damaged in the bombing raid, so with two engines out, the YB-40 was even slower, and flew back completely solo. Sure enough, a P-38 approached, one engine feathered, and asked to join up for the trip back in very good english. Fisher almost fell for the same trap again. With the extra firepower of the friendly P-38 along, everything was being unloaded, guns, ammo, armor plate, anything to keep the YB-40 in the air. At this point Rossi came over the radio with an innocent question. "Gina, nice name. Your girl?" Fisher froze and ordered his men to keep their guns, and started baiting Rossi with details of his 'relationship' with Gina of Constantine.

Rossi became enraged, fired up the 'dead' engine, and circled around, intending to fire right through the nose, cockpit and the entire length of the YB-40. The '40 had an innovation that was later added to all B-17's, a chin turret. As Rossi came in, he faced down a total of 8 forward firing .50's. As the P-38 came apart Rossi even tried to ram the YB-40, but could not maintain flight. He ditched and was picked up by Allied pilot rescue and remained a prisoner for the remainder of the war.

Lt. Harold Fisher received the Distinguished Flying Cross for the encounter, and Major Fisher was killed during a crash in the Berlin Airlift. Former Lt. Guido Rossi attended his funeral out of respect.

Sauf
02-17-2011, 08:17 PM
Interesting story

Novotny
02-17-2011, 09:03 PM
That's an incredible story.

Sokol1
02-17-2011, 09:46 PM
This P-38 history is Martin Caiden fiction, the real Itlian P-38:

"On June 12, 1943, a USAAF P-38G, while on a flight from Gibraltar to Malta, suffered compass problems and landed by mistake at Capoterra, Sardinia. The Lightning was painted in Italian markings, and transferred to the Italian Test Center at Guidonia. On August 11, 1943, chief test pilot Col. Angelo Tondi used the P-38 to intercept USAAF bombers on their way to attack targets in central Italy. Tondi shot down a B-17F, "Bonnie Sue", of the 419th BS, 301st BG. This was the only successful interception achieved by the P-38G, which was soon grounded due to the poor quality of Italian gasoline, which corroded the fuel tanks. I believe that this is the only documented example of a captured US fighter being used to shoot down a US aircraft during WW2."

Sokol1

Krt_Bong
02-18-2011, 05:47 AM
Since I have now located two stories of slightly different accounts of the same incident it is indeed possible that this is not a true story, I have never read Forked Tailed Devil by Caidin or I certainly would have recognised the story, I have read The Last Dogfight and Cyborg (the basis for the Six-Million-Dollar-Man) which were works of fiction and I also read Samurai! but as I now know there were a lot of inaccuracies in that book that Saburo Sakai wasn't aware of before the book was published and it is certainly known that Caidin liked to embellish.

White Owl
02-18-2011, 06:03 AM
I recall reading something very similar - presented as a true story - in which the B-17 that shot down the P-38 was Old 666, and both the American and German pilots involved became friends after the war's end. Now I can't find where I read that. I wonder if any of these stories have basis in factual history. :confused:

Insuber
02-24-2011, 10:34 PM
There is a true story of an Italian pilot who in a captured P-38 would call out to stragglers from a bomber mission as a "little friend" to fly with them home and after getting close enough would shoot them down. Eventually a trap was set for him with a specially outfited B-17 and he was shot down, apparently they knew enough about him to name the bomber after his girlfriend and when he flew alongside and inquired about the name the Pilot in fact described his girlfriend and lured him in..

(found the story)

In 1943 a P-38 ran out of fuel and ditched outside Sardinia. The pilot was overwhelmed by locals before he could use his pistol to ignite the tanks and burn the craft. Rossi had the clever idea of using the captured P-38 to kill wounded B-17's returning from bombing missions as stragglers. He bagged several bombers this way. One B-17 Pilot, Lt. Harold Fisher survived an attack, and had trouble convincing others that he was shot down by a 'friendly'.

Fisher was persistent and obtained command of a prototype YB-40 gunship, and flew several missions lagging behind the rest of the bombers trying to lure out the 'Phantom' P-38. As intelligence was gathered in Italy, they discovered Rossi and his captured '38 did indeed exist and had a wife in Constantine. Allies occupied this city, so when the nose art was applied to the YB-40, the artist used a photo of Rossi's wife, and named the gunship after her, 'Gina'.

Fisher flew a mission on August 31st that year, and was actually damaged in the bombing raid, so with two engines out, the YB-40 was even slower, and flew back completely solo. Sure enough, a P-38 approached, one engine feathered, and asked to join up for the trip back in very good english. Fisher almost fell for the same trap again. With the extra firepower of the friendly P-38 along, everything was being unloaded, guns, ammo, armor plate, anything to keep the YB-40 in the air. At this point Rossi came over the radio with an innocent question. "Gina, nice name. Your girl?" Fisher froze and ordered his men to keep their guns, and started baiting Rossi with details of his 'relationship' with Gina of Constantine.

Rossi became enraged, fired up the 'dead' engine, and circled around, intending to fire right through the nose, cockpit and the entire length of the YB-40. The '40 had an innovation that was later added to all B-17's, a chin turret. As Rossi came in, he faced down a total of 8 forward firing .50's. As the P-38 came apart Rossi even tried to ram the YB-40, but could not maintain flight. He ditched and was picked up by Allied pilot rescue and remained a prisoner for the remainder of the war.

Lt. Harold Fisher received the Distinguished Flying Cross for the encounter, and Major Fisher was killed during a crash in the Berlin Airlift. Former Lt. Guido Rossi attended his funeral out of respect.

Oh no, again the Rossi fake story. Urban legends never die.

Kr0nik
03-08-2011, 08:39 PM
Been flying at Battlefield Europe WW11OL for 12 yrs, been waiting for this game for half that time, HURRYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

trumps
03-11-2011, 01:11 PM
i don't care what the knockers say this game looks beautiful, and i can't wait to get hold of it!!

Cheers
Craig