CoD--Becoming a Masterpiece

[nodlew]

My first post concerning this game was a rant about performance, but with the last two patches, the game is playable for me now, even on a modest PC--

Vista™ Ultimate
E4600 @ 2.40GHz (2 CPUs), ~2.4GHz
Memory: 3326MB RAM
NVidia 9800 GT

If I replace my MOBO, OC or upgrade my CPU, and upgrade my GPU I could go to higher graphics settings, but at the moment the terrain looks good enough as long as I can pull lead on a bomber skimming the tree-tops without stutters and game-breakingly bad FPS.

So now I'm ready to start praising this sim, which I have been wanting to do all along. And I invite anyone else so inclined to add their own like-minded input.

One of the things that maddening about Il-2 was the extreme difficulty spotting, tracking, and identifying bogies/ufo's. I do not have track IR, and the way things are going, I probably never will. Trying to keep a target in sight in Il-2 using the snap and pan views of my joystick hat was murder. Ultimately, not workable. So I tried using the mouse, training my left hand (also tried my foot...) to work the mouse to look around while I flew with my right hand on the stick. This was better. I finally had to replace my joystick and I got an X-45 Hotas system allowing me to use one hat-switch in mouse emulation mode to look around, and with practice this was even better. But the insurmountable problem was that the graphics in Il-2, although great for the time the game was created, of course, were just not good enough to make objects distinguishable at any distance. And when everyone is in a plane, going over 200 mph, distances can get very large very quickly. I spent (at least) half my time trying to find something--anything!--else in the air. Once I found it (often by a guilty resort to the map) I would have to chase right up on top of it before I could tell whether it was a 109 or a P-47. I ruined my eyesight and risked a brain aneurism playing Il-2. The color was such that a bomber 200 ft below could be completely invisible against the water, or the terrain. At any larger distance, you were searching for tiny black specks moving slightly against a dark background. It was hell. If it wasn't such a wonderful game, it would make an excellent instrument of physical and psychological torture.

This game us MUCH BETTER. (!) Having spotted a plane, I can usually keep it in sight. I only lose sight of my target in conditions of poor visibility (haze, darkness, clouds) or because it does something unexpected, and I can tell what it is from much, much farther away. The effect on the playability of the sim cannot be over stated. I can see the yellow nose of a 109 from quite far away, likewise the wing configurations of various aircraft. Since playing this sim for some hundreds of hours now, I have fired on a friendly aircraft maybe four times, and those were when I was still very new to the sim.

The ability to realistically tailor ammunition load-outs and to set convergence specifically for each gun in both the hor and ver planes is a fantastic feature. As far as I know, it is a first in any military flight sim. One of many, many firsts, I'm sure. There has never been a flight sim like this one, and it is as yet in its infancy.

The realism of the gunsight mechanisms is stunning.

Pulling lead on enemy planes is SO MUCH EASIER than it was in Il-2, or in any other WWII flight sim I've ever played. Pulling lead was next to impossible in the older games, it was a black art. You really had to learn to shoot with the enemy hidden under the nose of your plane--it was ridiculous. I knew that it wasn't right. Aerial gunnery is a skill, difficult to master, it is not a feat worthy of a Zen Master, not a magic trick. Somehow, with the better sights and the realistic ballistics and the better flight behaviors, it is now possible to use the reflector gunsight on a fighter in this game to compute lead and shoot at a moving target. Hooray for the human race.

I am no expert about flight models. I have never flown an airplane, although I have flown in some airplanes, the experience being much like being on a bus, except at 20,000 ft. But, for me, the planes are much easier to fly than the planes in Il-2. I almost never stall except when I am at the top of an 80deg zoom-climb chasing an enemy fighter. I have stalled and spun a couple of times--spins are difficult to recover from, maybe I should try the training mission. The AI advantage in aircraft performance is not a shadow of what it was in Il-2. I don't feel the AI has any unfair advantage at all, honestly. Most of the time, I pity them in their futile attempts to escape (until the 20mm golf-balls start racing by my cockpit). My instinct, is that the flight models are more realistic. Some planes in Il-2 were ridiculously difficult to fly (Mustang, anyone?)

For those who point to the crazy rolls of the BF-110, yeah, I think sustained maneuvers like that would be physically impossible, both for the aircraft, and in terms of the pilot's endurance. Like I said, I don't know anything about the real-world capacities of WWII planes, or comparatively nothing. Still, by employing the rudders, on those planes, flying at comparatively low speeds, I can see how they could be made to flip on a dime. Try kicking the rudder in your hurricane full left or right during a roll and you will see the difference.

As for damage models, to me, they seem very realistic. I was surprised the first time I emptied my guns into a bomber and watched it fly merrilly away in a cloud of debris. The last patch improved on that, and the bombers now seem just about right to me. With an accuracy that varies from 10 to 30 percent hits, I usually can shoot down a couple of bombers per mission. My best so far is four Dorniers in the first mission, realistic ammo, of course. And now that I've figured out how to save gun convergence and custom ammo load-outs, my kill ratio should go up.

I think the patches have improved the aggressiveness of the AI as well. I had just begun one mission and suddenly, unaccountably, my screen went black. I thought the game had crashed, but no, I was dead. I checked the track and was surprised to see that a 109 came up at me head-on from below my nose and blew me away with his 20mm cannon. Must have been one of the veterans. I have trouble now with enemy on my tail. They can be hard to shake, following me through tight circles and multiple loops. They are also hard to see. The danger has increased a lot and I like it.

I like the AI in the game generally. I like the fact that bombers attempt to stay in formation--just as they did historically, knowing that to be isolated was to be as good as dead. I like the fact that bombers take smaller, but clever evasive maneuvers, like varying altitude to throw off a pursuer's aim, but not taking off and making like the Red Baron a-la IL-2. And if they get desperate, they will break off and act more desperately. Ace level bombers are not easy pickings. Their gunners are Il-2-like in their accuracy. Fly straight at them from behind and they will shoot your eyes out. They are very dangerous.

The possibilities inherent in the ground war dimension of the game, given the detail of the ground vehicles, are...vast. Well worth upgrading my present piece of junk to a respectable machine.

This post is long already. Anyway, in conclusion...

I was mad because the game was buggy (is still buggy) upon release, but mostly mad because I couldn't find a way to make it playable.

The patches have been released with unexpected urgency and they have effectively addressed the worst of the problems, and beyond the problems, this game is shaping up to be absolutely magnificent.
:grin:

[garengarch]

Very nicely put - and agreed !

[602Sqn.McLean]

nodlew can I ask what country you're from? I just purchased TrackIr 4 with Vector and I still have my TrackIr 3. It still works like a champion. Its all yours mate if you want it.

[TwistedAdonis]

nodlew can I ask what country you're from? I just purchased TrackIr 4 with Vector and I still have my TrackIr 3. It still works like a champion. Its all yours mate if you want it.

*wipes away a tear*...that's beautiful man...*sniff*

[nodlew]

602Sqn.McLean

Are you serious? Damn. Didn't expect that. I'm in the USA--Central,VA. Gee whiz. I would come up with the postal charges, I mean if they weren't really high. Anyway, just the offer really is beautiful. Generosity is a beautiful thing.

[602Sqn.McLean]

I'm serious mate. It's only going to sit there anyway. I'm in Canberra, Australia. I don't reckon it'll be very expensive to send. Is there some way to send me your postal address privately so the world doesn't see it. I'll check out how much it will cost to send from here.
**Just worked it out nodlew. I've sent you a private message via this forum**

[nodlew]

602Sqn.McLean,

I'll see if I can figure out how to send you a PM with my email address. Really, thanks man. I'm kinda unemployed, not ashamed to say it--health problems. So money is kinda tight. I can manage big things--like the new $50 mother board--through force of will, but track ir, I kinda gave up on that. I'm psyched to try it. Gonna try to PM you, never done it on this board before, but shouldn't ultimately be beyond my capacities...

[AARPRazorbacks]

Yes, CoD is looking very good.

I live in the USA and must be one of the very few from the States to have this sim.

I'm going throw the growing pains with CoD.

Is it worth this.

Very much so.

That is if you like WWII flight sims.


Dev's just keep spooning CoD and it will keep getting better.

flyer01

[Strike]

http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/560906397095645290/50547A5B841F9EB273E8D747BA26A05725666003/

I am amazed at the damage model in this Sim.

It seems that it's really realistic now. You can hit a spit, and the bullet might - depending on angle and location - actually just puncture the aluminum panels and shoot out the other side, leaving a bullet exit hole.
Next bullet might actually go straight through the wing spar and tear the wing clean off or perforate a pneumatic hose and disable one of the flaps. Or even destroy the mechanical linkage and let the flap fall down unintentionally. I've also witnessed flaps with perforated pneumatic hoses "flap" violently back and forth in the windstream.. Looks very very good!


In this particular image however I hit the spit from 6 o'clock with a strafe of 20mm shells in the wing, completely removed the L/H aileron, destroyed the water cooler, shredded the tire with shrapnel and took out a few machine guns. The spit rolled over and plummeted into the ocean within 20 seconds. I often find myself pausing the game just so that I can review the damage of my opponent. The awesome part is you can switch to this particular plane and experience the results of your own carnage at the receiving end! Pretty awesome if you ask me, and an excellent tool for movie makers!

Gotta say this sim is growing on me nicely!

[mazex]

Damn it's good that this forum has now mostly gotten rid of the whiners that say they will never buy unfinished products etc, and instead people are starting to see the gem that we have in front of us that the poor devs where forced to release just a few months to early by the publishers! I agree with almost everything you write and it now runs really great on my 4 year old system too.

Like someone wrote in another thread. Try starting IL2 now and prepare to be amazed with how crappy and outdated it feels!

[snwkill]

Yep my only dream is a 30 second replay function, also the "start recording" button crashed my game last time I used it, haven't gotten to try it with the new beta yet.

I figured they would keep up the good work, from what I have seen not many of their games have ever been highly rated. I will take tons of content after release, any day over a nice release and then no community.

[PeterPanPan]

Pulling lead was next to impossible in the older games, it was a black art. You really had to learn to shoot with the enemy hidden under the nose of your plane--it was ridiculous. I knew that it wasn't right.


Actually, this is quite accurate, for a Spitfire anyway. With its long nose, pulling a lead would hide the enemy under your nose. With its shorter nose, this is one advantage the Hurri had over the Spit.

PPP

[nodlew]

Peter,

I didn't mean that there were never situations where the target would get covered by the nose of your plane--depending on the orientation of your fighter vs. the location and vector of your target. There are certainly many possible firing solutions where it might be. In the case of a slow-maneuvering, slower-flying bomber with a large surface area, perhaps some of those solutions might be the ideal shot. Given the design of the gun sight, and given its necessary position above and behind the elongated engine of the plane (more pronounced on some planes than others), this would, physically, just plain have to be the case.

However, most of the WWII era gunnery manuals I have read, including "Bag the Hun!" (British, by the way) describe employing the gunsight reticule to estimate distance and proper lead of the target, and this is not possible unless one can maneuver one's own aircraft in such a way that the target remains visible in the sight relative to the reticule. The problems doing this in the past that I referred to were the result of a number of game deficiencies--the most egregious of them being that the sights were crudely modeled (too cramped, wrong size, no way to compensate for range by lofting your shells, etc.), making their employment unrealistically difficult. Another culprit is bad flight models of AI aircraft, or the player aircraft, causing planes to maneuver and fight in unnatural ways (not being able to employ rudder effectively in a turn for example), resulting in one never seeming to have a good sight picture of the target.

As Il-2 improved over the years, this problem was mitigated, and as my own skill increased, obviously I learned to compensate, pick my shots, and hit the enemy planes.

My point is that the way the AI behaves and the way my plane responds in Cliffs of Dover along with the realistic gunsights and ballistics of the shells has finally completely resolved this issue from my perspective. I am able, from any workable angle, to point my gunsight ahead of the enemy plane, work the ailerons and rudder to achieve my desired lead, fire my shots and usually witness the effect or lack thereof on the target.

And it is my assertion that this is a giant leap forward in the simulation of aerial combat of the WWII era.

Thank you for your time.



Another that I just thought of--AI aircraft, even if the flight models of the planes are correct to the nth degree, are free from the physical and psychological limitations (habits, proclivities) of human beings. AI aircraft have always behaved as if, beyond the programmed limitations of energy maneuver for the planes and avoiding collisions with the ground, they really couldn't care less if they are oriented "properly" to the Earth or not. In a dogfight, they are always turning as tightly as the code will allow them to get on your six, which means that every dog fight is the same Luftberry circle, with your and your opponent's planes standing on their wingtips, turning at the edge of blacking out, until one can fire on the other. In this orientation, the target will ALWAYS be beneath the nose of your plane, since to keep on him you must be in the same maneuver plane as he is, and in a tight turn, the shells will drop off very dramatically, or rather, instantly. I do not detect this behavior in CoD, and I am very pleased to be able to say so.

Here, again, I have written ten pounds of verbiage and taken extreme grammatical pains to be clear in order to make myself understood, when really, anyone who was making any effort to understand me in the first place would have taken my meaning from the earlier pithy remark. It's a good thing I really like listening to myself talk...er, type.

[rakinroll]

Like someone wrote in another thread. Try starting IL2 now and prepare to be amazed with how crappy and outdated it feels!

Yes, CoD is amazing but il2 still gives what i need about ww2 simulation. I do not agree with you.

[nodlew]

Thanks Strike, for the nice screen and the elaboration on the damage model. The damage model in this game is, I think, still quite above most of our heads in terms of the realism and complexity it attempts to produce in game. But I am already seeing some of the variety possible. In my last mission, a pretty big one in the FMB with Hurricanes, Spits, Blenheims, 110s, and 109s, I finally caused my first gunnery induced explosion in a target--pretty sure that's what it was. Anyway, with a short burst there was a fireball and the wing on the 110 I was shooting at broke in half. I've set quite a few on fire, but no explosions until now. I probably hit the ammo--don't think fuel tanks explode catastrophically (generally).

And I can confirm that the custom loadouts and gun harmonization greatly increases lethality. With a hit percentage of only 17% in that mission, I was responsible for destroying 3 enemy planes, and contributed to downing another--3 BF-110s, and 1 BF-109, with all my guns harmonized in the ver and hor at 300 yds, ammo load out pretty equally devoted to Ball, Inc, and AP.

[nodlew]

Blew up all right, but was not ammo, must have been fuel.

Screen 1 shows moment I open fire, guns harmed at 300 yds--

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/picture.php?albumid=101&pictureid=676

Screens 2 & 3 show the impact of the first rounds--incendiary obviously--

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/picture.php?albumid=101&pictureid=677

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/picture.php?albumid=101&pictureid=678

Then this happens--

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/picture.php?albumid=101&pictureid=680

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/picture.php?albumid=101&pictureid=679

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/picture.php?albumid=101&pictureid=681

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/picture.php?albumid=101&pictureid=682

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/picture.php?albumid=101&pictureid=683

So, 110 hit right at the wing root by a very few rounds, including one or two incendiaries--explosion shears wing off, big orange gasoline-looking fireball, which trails the plane for a second or two, then snuffs out, leaving the plane plummeting, barely smoking--pilot bailed and survived.

I would love to know what gadget I hit to produce that effect. Anyway, I will be aiming at that spot next time I shoot at a 110.

I wonder if this could be one of those situations where a fuel leak caused a build up of fumes in the wing and surrounding air, and then the incendiaries ignited that and caused the explosion. If so that might be hard to intentionally repeat.

[Tvrdi]

we must be fair, so....I treid multiplayer last night...syndicate server, and it was smooth most of the time, FPS avg 50 on my pc. That is when 25 ppl were there. In video settings I reduced only buildings and trees. AA set to 2x. Vsync is working now but still it seams that head panning isnt smooth as it should be (as it is in other games). Still stuttered a bit but only occasionaly. So there is hopw the sim will be optimised and polished even better and that they will fix the landscape and external engine sounds. And a small note, nobody pointed out before, I noticed that the stick in the cockpit is not moving smoothly (offline too)...

[Strike]

Blew up all right, but was not ammo, must have been fuel.

Then this happens--

So, 110 hit right at the wing root by a very few rounds, including one or two incendiaries--explosion shears wing off, big orange gasoline-looking fireball, which trails the plane for a second or two, then snuffs out, leaving the plane plummeting, barely smoking--pilot bailed and survived.

I would love to know what gadget I hit to produce that effect. Anyway, I will be aiming at that spot next time I shoot at a 110.

I wonder if this could be one of those situations where a fuel leak caused a build up of fumes in the wing and surrounding air, and then the incendiaries ignited that and caused the explosion. If so that might be hard to intentionally repeat.

To be quite fair I havn't seen tons of guncam clips where wings have been BLOWN off. They are quite sturdy and the wingspars are basically massive girters that run across nearly the entire span. What it looks like to me is fueltank detonation. And the huge fireball is the result of the evaporating/combusting fuel that is spilled out of the fueltank and finally it's all gone up in smoke.

Looks quite spot-on to me :) Thanks for sharing!

[Blackdog_kt]

Sure, there's a lot of stuff that needs fixing but overall i'm happy for the time being because my time is taken up by learning all the new features.

If we had a sim with 2-3 flyables and a simpler type of gameplay it would be a different story, because there wouldn't be enough things to occupy us and we would end up focusing on the negative parts.

As it currently is i find that i can overcome the occasional frustration very easily, simply because i'm overwhelmed by a myriad of small, subtle details. Each one by itself is not much, but when i fly a sortie and i get 3-4 of these small, sometimes hard to notice events i realise it's exactly that which raises immersion to new levels for me.

There are so many variables that by the time we've experienced and become accustomed to all the ways each aircraft can break apart or get shot down and the novelty factor has worn off, sufficient time will have passed for new features to be enabled or the game to be better optimized still.

In that sense i find that while it's far from perfect as a total, it has a lot of excellent elements and enough variation to keep my mind from focusing on the bad points until they get fixed.

Long story short, i know it's not there yet and i won't blindly deny it, it's just that there's an ample amount of features so well done to experience while flying and those can make me completely forget about the parts that need fixing. It's enjoyable enough at this point and it will only get better with time, so i'm not worried at all.

To add to the original theme of the thread, i was practicing some QMB sorties yesterday flying the 109 and 110 (i had been flying Hurris lately so i thought i might brush up on my Luftwaffe skills and improve my prop-pitch technique while in a dogfight).
I was using default convergence (anyone know what range it is by the way?) but i usually shoot from much closer in short bursts. The combination of these two factors results in my cannon shells usually going wide of the target, so i decided to see how the 109s machine guns fare against the opposition.

At some point i was bounced by a Hurricane but i didn't receive any damage. I engaged him in a scissors fight and after taking advantage of the 109s good low speed handling, the fact that it can hang very well on the prop and that it accelerates well, i managed to force an overshoot and then catch up to him almost instantly, at which point it was his turn to start the scissors.

From my days flying IL2:1946 i have a habit of pointing my gunsights in the target's trajectory and waiting for him to come in my line of fire, instead of trying to constantly force my plane around and bleed energy in the process. This works especially well in the low speed range where the enemy can't make any abrupt maneuvers for fear of stalling, so you can for the most part point your nose a bit ahead of him and wait until he crosses the point where you estimate the required lead to be.

So, we were both in a left turn, i was in lag pursuit and at that point i saw him reversing. I kept going for a few degrees more, leveled off and started reversing myself but only mildly so, putting myself from a left-handed lag pursuit into a right-handed lead pursuit curve in a way that his trajectory would intersect mine at about 40-60 degrees angle off while being roughly aligned with his plane of motion. Having conserved most of my cannon rounds up to that point i decided to fire all guns, since the aspect under which the target was visible was broad enough and our speeds favorably slow to stand a chance of scoring good hits, despite being much closer than convergence...his entire fuselage and most of his wing was about to cross my sights at a leisurely pace due to the high angle-off and our minimal relative speed.

At that point i got one of those "instinctive" snapshots, which for some reason have always worked much better for me than going to zoom view or taking deliberate, calculated shots that end up with me overcompensating for the target's actions. These are always a great satisfaction to achieve. So, i had him in my 10 o'clock and as he crossed into my 11 i added a bit of rudder to steady the aim and with the gunsight about 5 degrees off his nose i pressed both triggers for a split-second, probably just enough for maybe 2-4 rounds to fly from my cannons. I saw the tracers stream unerringly towards his cockpit, one connecting perfectly between wing-root and canopy and the other slightly aft.

He immediately went up in flames and spiraled out of control into the water below without bailing out, according to the info text i had scored a pilot kill.

[Strike]

Sure, there's a lot of stuff that needs fixing but overall i'm happy for the time being because my time is taken up by learning all the new features.

If we had a sim with 2-3 flyables and a simpler type of gameplay it would be a different story, because there wouldn't be enough things to occupy us and we would end up focusing on the negative parts.

As it currently is i find that i can overcome the occasional frustration very easily, simply because i'm overwhelmed by a myriad of small, subtle details. Each one by itself is not much, but when i fly a sortie and i get 3-4 of these small, sometimes hard to notice events i realise it's exactly that which raises immersion to new levels for me.

There are so many variables that by the time we've experienced and become accustomed to all the ways each aircraft can break apart or get shot down and the novelty factor has worn off, sufficient time will have passed for new features to be enabled or the game to be better optimized still.

In that sense i find that while it's far from perfect as a total, it has a lot of excellent elements and enough variation to keep my mind from focusing on the bad points until they get fixed.

Long story short, i know it's not there yet and i won't blindly deny it, it's just that there's an ample amount of features so well done to experience while flying and those can make me completely forget about the parts that need fixing. It's enjoyable enough at this point and it will only get better with time, so i'm not worried at all.

To add to the original theme of the thread, i was practicing some QMB sorties yesterday flying the 109 and 110 (i had been flying Hurris lately so i thought i might brush up on my Luftwaffe skills and improve my prop-pitch technique while in a dogfight).
I was using default convergence (anyone know what range it is by the way?) but i usually shoot from much closer in short bursts. The combination of these two factors results in my cannon shells usually going wide of the target, so i decided to see how the 109s machine guns fare against the opposition.

At some point i was bounced by a Hurricane but i didn't receive any damage. I engaged him in a scissors fight and after taking advantage of the 109s good low speed handling, the fact that it can hang very well on the prop and that it accelerates well, i managed to force an overshoot and then catch up to him almost instantly, at which point it was his turn to start the scissors.

From my days flying IL2:1946 i have a habit of pointing my gunsights in the target's trajectory and waiting for him to come in my line of fire, instead of trying to constantly force my plane around and bleed energy in the process. This works especially well in the low speed range where the enemy can't make any abrupt maneuvers for fear of stalling, so you can for the most part point your nose a bit ahead of him and wait until he crosses the point where you estimate the required lead to be.

So, we were both in a left turn, i was in lag pursuit and at that point i saw him reversing. I kept going for a few degrees more, leveled off and started reversing myself but only mildly so, putting myself from a left-handed lag pursuit into a right-handed lead pursuit curve in a way that his trajectory would intersect mine at about 40-60 degrees angle off while being roughly aligned with his plane of motion. Having conserved most of my cannon rounds up to that point i decided to fire all guns, since the aspect under which the target was visible was broad enough and our speeds favorably slow to stand a chance of scoring good hits, despite being much closer than convergence...his entire fuselage and most of his wing was about to cross my sights at a leisurely pace due to the high angle-off and our minimal relative speed.

At that point i got one of those "instinctive" snapshots, which for some reason have always worked much better for me than going to zoom view or taking deliberate, calculated shots that end up with me overcompensating for the target's actions. These are always a great satisfaction to achieve. So, i had him in my 10 o'clock and as he crossed into my 11 i added a bit of rudder to steady the aim and with the gunsight about 5 degrees off his nose i pressed both triggers for a split-second, probably just enough for maybe 2-4 rounds to fly from my cannons. I saw the tracers stream unerringly towards his cockpit, one connecting perfectly between wing-root and canopy and the other slightly aft.

He immediately went up in flames and spiraled out of control into the water below without bailing out, according to the info text i had scored a pilot kill.

Nice story mate.

Most impressive part is what you started saying. The variables in this game are so many you have basically infinate possibilities of an outcome of a dogfight or larger furball. Anything can happen. I actually watched one of my tracks the other day where I was chasing a 110 and suddenly my Hurri caught fire. I jettisoned the canopy and bailed out over the british coast. I thought well jerry tailgunner sniped my fueltank, but when reviewing the track I was looking at the target early on in my engagement only to notice the gunner was already dead before I closed in on him...

weird, it turns out a second 110 being chased by another hurri going 90 degrees in relative to my direction did it. His tailgunner was shooting at the hurricane below me off to my right hand side and he missed but the single stray incendiary or tracer bullet hit my fueltank and set it on fire..

WHAT ARE THE ODDS!? of course for some stupid reason it's all corrupted since the latest patch. Like old times in IL-2. My plane just shoots thin air and crashes into the ocean way too early.. weird.

[nodlew]

To be quite fair I havn't seen tons of guncam clips where wings have been BLOWN off...

Agreed, there's that famous one with the Bf-109 hit in the left wing producing a very violent explosion--appears to be ammo--which instantly detaches the wing and the plane goes into an super-fast counter-clockwise rotation.

There are various films of all kinds of aircraft blowing up in every way possible--I'm sure Oleg's team has studied them all and could tell us what part failed as a result of what kind of ammo strike.

I am thinking that, perhaps, there is a finer physical modeling at work here than I expected. I was surprised that firing at bombers with multiple leaks in their wing-tanks streaming fuel almost never sets them on fire. But then, usually, those planes are going pretty fast, which prevents evaporated fuel from building up in the air around and within them. I have experimented myself, and it is pretty impossible to ignite gasoline in its liquid state. Only the fumes are combustible--volatility refers to the tendency of a liquid to produce combustible/explosive FUMES. When I achieved the kill on the 110 in the screens above, it was moving pretty slow in a climbing turn. If you look at the screens you can see a gray "mist" shrouding the wing. Fuel vapors? So perhaps in order to fully appreciate the damage model of the game, I'm going to have to remember some basic chemistry and physics. If so, consider me VERY impressed.

Some befuddling things are beginning to make sense to me--like the time I hit the elevator of a 110 and set it on fire, causing the crew to instantly bail. It was a tiny little orange spot on the elevator of the plane. I was thinking, "What is back there that could catch fire?" Answer? Hydraulic lines.

I think the AI has been tweaked to good effect in the last patch, and the previous one. There seems to be more variety. I shot a 109 and set its engine completely ablaze. The cockpit was completely engulfed, but the pilot continued to pursue his target and attack. It was something to see, that one plane, looking lie a meteor, pressing his attack. Can't remember what happened next. Did he finally bail? Burn to death and crash? Didn't pay attention. But where another might say "Dude, the AI is retarded! The guy didn't bail and his plane was totally on fire!" I say, "Dude, very cool! I just shot down an extremely dedicated National Socialist!"

Maybe one of the things we have to overcome, is that over the years playing other flight sims, we have come to take certain kinds of events and AI behaviors as "right" which aren't necessarily so. Just because a pilot will bail out 100% of the time when his plane is completely on fire in Il-2, doesn't mean that in reality all pilots instantly bailed out if their planes were on fire. People do crazy things.

I was using default convergence (anyone know what range it is by the way?)

Blackdog, I believe the default convergence for all planes is ~ 338 meters both vertical and horizontal, which my conversion calculator says is about 370 yds. I'm certain at this point that the game takes conversion in metric units, which is no problem in a German plane. There is a thread here that shows how to change the default convergence of the planes, and how to save custom loadouts etc for particular missions. I will find it and provide a link. Setting my own gun convergence has really helped me a lot. I like 300 yds since it is historical (for the Americans anyway, probably the Brits too) and I enjoy practicing deflection shooting. Yes, I could set my guns to 200 or 150 yds, and close to point-blank range and chop up planes like celery, but that seems a little cheesy to me, although it was the preferred tactic of the highest scoring aces of the war. They were mere killers with no sense of sportsmanship, says I. I will provide a link to the relevant thread. I hope the next patch fixes this bug that won't let us save custom gun configs in the normal way.

Here is the link to the ammo-loadout, gun convergence information: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=21773&highlight=gun+convergence

[Strike]

I am thinking that, perhaps, there is a finer physical modeling at work here than I expected. I was surprised that firing at bombers with multiple leaks in their wing-tanks streaming fuel almost never sets them on fire. But then, usually, those planes are going pretty fast, which prevents evaporated fuel from building up in the air around and within them.

You may very well be on to something here, never thought it could be that detailed, but I know fire can be spread at low airspeeds and I know they are put out at higher airspeeds.


Some befuddling things are beginning to make sense to me--like the time I hit the elevator of a 110 and set it on fire, causing the crew to instantly bail. It was a tiny little orange spot on the elevator of the plane. I was thinking, "What is back there that could catch fire?" Answer? Hydraulic lines.

Now luftwhiners, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the 110 did not have hydraulic elevators or rudders. The simpler, the better for warmachines I think, until speeds grew a lot during the late part of the war. However, the fabric or some internal structure shielded from the wind may indeed catch fire from the tracer rounds. Paint, lubricants and even metal itself can catch fire if superheated :)

"Dude, very cool! I just shot down an extremely dedicated National Socialist!"

That sentance just made my day! ROFL! Thank you! :)

[nodlew]

I believe the 110 did not have hydraulic elevators or rudders...

Learn something new every day. We're talking about a pretty realistic sim when to understand events in the game we need to understand the mechanical make-up of the target and the physical properties of those parts.

I'm gonna go and study-up on the 110, 109, Spit, and Hurricane to start--find out where the fuel tanks are, whatever else I can find out--maybe read some real life accounts if I can find them of how real Luftwaffe and British pilots achieved their kills, and try to apply it in-game.

Glad I gave you a laugh, Strike. I meant that in all seriousness, but reading it over, it is a pretty good joke.

[Cpt.Badger]

Damn it's good that this forum has now mostly gotten rid of the whiners that say they will never buy unfinished products etc, and instead people are starting to see the gem that we have in front of us that the poor devs where forced to release just a few months to early by the publishers!

Keep buying unfinished products. Also, get some lube with your next purchase.

[proton45]

Damn it's good that this forum has now mostly gotten rid of the whiners that say they will never buy unfinished products etc, and instead people are starting to see the gem that we have in front of us that the poor devs where forced to release just a few months to early by the publishers! I agree with almost everything you write and it now runs really great on my 4 year old system too.

Like someone wrote in another thread. Try starting IL2 now and prepare to be amazed with how crappy and outdated it feels!

Yea...I don't really understand the people who get really angry and worked up. The initial release was disappointing, and a bit surprising...but I figure that Oleg and crew would fix stuff as quickly as they could. The game release was a big muck-up & Oleg had to find the situation embarrassing...but over the 10 years I've been playing IL2, and visiting the forums, I've never sensed anything (from oleg) but dedication to the franchises.

[Oktoberfest]

Yea...I don't really understand the people who get really angry and worked up. The initial release was disappointing, and a bit surprising...but I figure that Oleg and crew would fix stuff as quickly as they could. The game release was a big muck-up & Oleg had to find the situation embarrassing...but over the 10 years I've been playing IL2, and visiting the forums, I've never sensed anything (from oleg) but dedication to the franchises.

Guys, your God Oleg is OUT OF THE HOUSE. He LEFT THE BUILDING. OLEG is no more. It has ceased to be a developper of this thing ! He's not working on this sim anymore. Can you get it ???

[robtek]

Well Oktoberfest, thats not what he said.
So: you is wrong!

[Stukadriver]

So you are in the U.S.? Has this been "officially" released in the U.S.? I am wondering when to purchase it and I want to be sure of what version I have; what patches are in it aleardy, etc. Is that possible?
Thanks.

[nodlew]

Keep buying unfinished products. Also, get some lube with your next purchase.


Badger, my complaint about the initial state of this game is publicly on record here on this forum, under performance issues. And my first post, before the patches, was pretty strongly worded.

However, with the patches, the game is playable--not perfect, but playable. And when you start to look at the positive aspects of it, the built in possibilities, the negative aspects begin to seem pretty insignificant. There is a time to protest and to evince your displeasure, but for anyone with the intelligence to appreciate the finer aspects, realism, detail of this sim, that time is passing if not already passed.

As for lube, no thank you, but please be my guest and use your own supply to liberally slather your own head and stick it back up your own anus where we wont have to listen to your crude remarks anymore. :)

Guys, your God Oleg is OUT OF THE HOUSE. He LEFT THE BUILDING. OLEG is no more. It has ceased to be a developper of this thing ! He's not working on this sim anymore. Can you get it ???

Really? I didn't know that. Doesn't change anything for me, I'm not talking about Oleg, I'm talking about CoD. Anyway, you sound like an asshole too, so why don't you join Badger and the two of you can pool your lubes and help each other in the delicate head-anus insertion process? Make a night of it.:)

[Sutts]

Badger, my complaint about the initial state of this game is publicly on record here on this forum, under performance issues. And my first post, before the patches, was pretty strongly worded.

However, with the patches, the game is playable--not perfect, but playable. And when you start to look at the positive aspects of it, the built in possibilities, the negative aspects begin to seem pretty insignificant. There is a time to protest and to evince your displeasure, but for anyone with the intelligence to appreciate the finer aspects, realism, detail of this sim, that time is passing if not already passed.

As for lube, no thank you, but please be my guest and use your own supply to liberally slather your own head and stick it back up your own anus where we wont have to listen to your crude remarks anymore. :)



Really? I didn't know that. Doesn't change anything for me, I'm not talking about Oleg, I'm talking about CoD. Anyway, you sound like an asshole too, so why don't you join Badger and the two of you can pool your lubes and help each other in the delicate head-anus insertion process? Make a night of it.:)


LOL:grin:

[reflected]

Becoming a masterpiece? ehm...at this stage? It's like when DaVinchi bought the canvas for Mona Lisa :D

I mean it certainly has a great potential, and I'm sure that with care and devotion fro mthe part of the devs and us it will become a masterpiece one day, just not yet. What we see is barely a few brush strokes, without much artistic or decorative value ;)

However, I'm sure we'll have our Mona Lisa one day, so keep it up 1c!

[jibo]

so move along Opitz

[dougandtoni]

so move along Opitz

And why should he move along.I think he has made a valid statment. This is a forum is it not:confused:

[robtek]

He should move along as it seems he only want to express his doomsday attitude.
It is because of people with a attitude like him that the general impression in the different forii(?) is so negative.
We have here a software where about 50% of the features are turned off!
There is so much to discover in the future when this stuff is turned on as the code is optimized and the hardware is used to its full extend.
People should realize that this might (is, imho) be the last chance for a wwII flight simulation!
The "instant gratification" crowd and the nay-sayers are the doom for this kind of software, they just seem to be too dumb to realize it.

[BigPickle]

I have to be honest, while i do agree with you robtek, I'm finding it real hard to be optimistic.
At the moment there's just too much missing from this game, and what is in game is 80% too broken to make it fun as it should be.
With no healthy PR program, headway in patches seems too slow to stem the loss at the moment of postive opinions.
No offical word on many questions asked by the community dont help to be fair, i bearly see any moderators anymore either.

[jibo]

hey kids, it's not the stock market, no need to give your opinion every hours

[BigPickle]

hey kids, it's not the stock market, no need to give your opinion every hours

ok if your going to be rude for no apparent reason at least come back and do it when you can string a coherent sentance together.

[Sternjaeger II]

hey kids, it's not the stock market, no need to give your opinion every hours

LOL :mrgreen:

guys, you really do whine too much.. this is not your FPS backed by mega brands like Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft, but in its incompleteness is still one of the most revolutionary products in its genre.

Let's try to keep things into perspective, you waited for YEARS before it could be released, and you well knew what you were gonna go to put up with, at least now you have it and can see the development of it hands on.

I wouldn't really complain if I were you.. :rolleyes:

[BigPickle]

I will complain if i want to untill i get what it says on the box :razz: because I along with everyone else believed it when we were told all is coming along great.

[robtek]

Complaining will accomplish nothing!!!
It just puts a negative touch on the forum.
There is just no alternative to the success of CoD for me.
The old IL2 has become so...flat.
It is no fun anymore and even with all this bugs and its incompleteness Cod is so much more fun to play, especially online as offline is plain boring, fighting against a chip, pfft!

[robtek]

Jester, everybody has the right to complain, no one disputes that!
It is only when the same persons complain again and again and again......
You get my drift?

[jibo]

As the customers they have right to complain AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN, till their complain is not resolved.
You get my drift?

yes but you have to understand that computer programming takes much longer than changing your diapers

[Oktoberfest]

Really? I didn't know that. Doesn't change anything for me, I'm not talking about Oleg, I'm talking about CoD. Anyway, you sound like an asshole too, so why don't you join Badger and the two of you can pool your lubes and help each other in the delicate head-anus insertion process? Make a night of it.:)

http://blogs.vizerra.com/vizerra_en/2010/12/oleg-maddox-joined-the-vizerra-team-interview.html

Funny that moderators leaves this kind of posts when other get deleted when the opinion is going the other way.

Anyway, I'm happy to be an asshole aware that he nearly got fucked by 1C and could avoid it.

BTW, the lube was for blind believers like you. But I guess you're so used to get fucked that you don't need it anymore.

[Blackdog_kt]

RoF released in much worse of a train-wreck state with only 4 flyable aircraft and a bunch of limitations by design plus equally frustrating hardware/optimization issues and two years on, there's people that swear by it.

Ditto for DCS A-10, whose developers were smart enough to say "you are not buying the final version, you just get access to the open beta because you pre-ordered".

In fact this is the only thing 1C should have done, call this an open beta and make it available to people who pre-order. They would still get a lot of funds because we're impatient and we'd like to try it out, we would still be flying it in it's current incomplete state and having loads of fun with the new features when it works as advertised, we'd still be submitting bug reports left and right and building a community-driven knowledge base, etc.

The only thing that would change is that the bitching would be less or even non-existent, because people would actually feel privileged to play the current buggy release if they were told that "you are not a buyer, you are a dedicated fan getting an advance preview thanks to your preorder and a beta tester that will helps us perfect this".
See, this is how gamers are, they like their status symbols enough that you could serve them almost anything and they would accept it, as long as you can make them think they are somehow in advance of the rest of pack. :-P

[nearmiss]

To you Naysayers and whiners.

We've read all the speculations and attacks on the developers.

Nothing you are saying makes a whit of difference. It doesn't matter whether you think you are right or not, or even entitled to say all kinds of bad things.

The developers are working 24/7 to produce a most excellent ww2 air combat simulation game. There is nothing more any of us could ask for, whether it shoulda or coulda makes absolutely no difference.

Straight talk... There is no one currently developing any WW2 air combat flight simulation genre of game for the PC. You, I and the rest of our enthusiastic membership have absolutely no choice for anything better than we have with anyone else. Every WW2 air combat simulation game for the PC is over 8 years old, and there is only one that meets the needs of our users... IL2. Without a BOB COD there is nothing, and there will be nothing for a very long time without the BOB COD.

This is the developers choice of forums, but when all the whiners congregate and keep running their mouths it won't be long until news will be very slow forthcoming.

Oleg has distanced himself from this crowd, but he hasn't gone completely away. Regardless, of what some may say. WE ARE INFORMED REGULARLY BY LUTHIER.

I say shut up with the negative talk. Either find something positive or constructive to post about or move on to another forums where you can join other whiners and complainers in their chorus of hateful speech.

We, moderators have received many reports from members to ban the members that persist in whining and complaining.

Everyone is tired of it.

[JG52Krupi]

@nearmiss
We really need a clapping simley for this forum, well said.

[Silverback]

We are the bata testers. So stop your bitchen and get back to work.

[David Hayward]

Bye Opitz!

[robtek]

Clap clap clap! What a innovative way to talk to the Maddox Games tricked customers! I just LOVE it... Just excellent... So we should just shut up or leave, right? So next time don't count with us again, all right?... I would rather play old Red Baron sim instead of buying anything from Maddox Games EVER AGAIN.

I hope your future customer base of 500 people world wide will make you happy.

Btw.. Your response is just the most arrogant post I have ever red on any game's official forum... You should be ashamed of yourself... What a sad end of the official IL2 community...

What a display of delusion! ROFL
Do you really think the few whiners make the majority??
They are loud and the same few post very often, that doesn't make them many.

[nodlew]

I hope your future customer base of 500 people world wide will make you happy.

You can't be serious? Even if Maddox games were to fold this afternoon, and all official support of Cliffs of Dover were to cease immediately, dozens, hundreds of amateur and semi-professional programmers would take up finishing this game On Their Own. There would be an instant call for the SDK, programming tools...

And whatever their success, or failure, hundreds of people, all flight-sim enthusiasts everywhere, would continue to work on and play this game for years, decades to come. You know why? Because, whatever its current bugs, there is nothing even in the same ballpark as this game. And there is no other company out there with the knowledge, the inclination, or the dedication to even attempt to produce one. Ever.

In fact, games like CoD are not made anymore. They don't exist. The profit margins are not high enough. They are too hard. The buying power of the Plane Nerd set is not potent enough to justify the effort involved. Ask the guys at TankSim.com how things are going in the Armored Warfare sim niche. And tanks are dirt simple to simulate compared to planes.

No, you are very wrong. Whether the folks at Maddox choose to kiss your ass or not, this game is by default the Name of the Game in WWII flight sims for the next decade. Anyone and everyone with a boner for WWII flight sims will be playing this game. And although a few may drop by the wayside, feel free to do so yourself, more will take up the game to compensate the grievous (snark) loss of your participation.

No, I am with those who choose to support Maddox games. I don't see anyone else producing anything comparable in the genre, and I predict that I won't see anyone else. I happen to love WWII, and I like simulations. I discovered flight simulation with Il-2 (and Jane's WWII Fighters--Jane's doesn't make flight sims anymore), I was always a tank sim guy before that (but they don't make tank sims anymore)*.

As I said at the beginning of this thread--I was angry about not being able to play the game, but I have witnessed the efforts of the Devs to fix those problems and I am mollified.

What the hell. All games these days are released with a bunch of bugs and problems. The classic games mature, and become refined. That's the way it works. What separates the companies that deserve our support from those that don't is their demonstration of their willingness to address these issues and perfect the game.

*Yeah, I know there's the new one with the T-62 and the M-60. I will definitely check it out.

[WT_Schmouddle]

I just come by.. and I am getting the drift..I guess

Mods here allow yaysayers to suggest naysayers to stick their head through their anus, no moderation there.
And as naysayers claim what they think is wrong, that is called negative attitude and their posts are deleted and their accounts profoundly banned.
I always thought mods are not here to herd the discussion the "righteous" way, they are supposed to be here to keep it civil, just like the Hyde Park soapbox keepers. You can talk whatever you can, but you shall not insult any other member, right?
Mods projecting their wishes about the product and baning others, that is A shame and a major no-no for an ordinary customer like me.

So, to the topic:
I am a sport pilot IRL, so take my commentary with grain of salt as the only warbird I ever piloted was humble 600hp Yak11 trainer (a plane similar to Texan I guess).

Regarding visibility:
Sorry, but that's how it is, quite often, IRL. Very often you cannot see white Cessna half a km away against city or cloud or haze. In the autumn, I met a group of WWI replicas inflight and as these are brown/green they were almost invisible against the terrain, only the strobe light of accompanying microlight gave their position on about 300m. So get used to it, even a collision is a possibility.

Flight models:
These are, IMHO very, very gentle. Even way too gentle. IRL I am really not sure whether I would dare to fly the Spitfire of Hurricare the way I do in COD. Heck, I was able to bring Hurricane without any problems to precise 3-spot landing on the precise spot on the airfield on my first try with 19fps and heavy stutter. I have never bent any metal in COD as a result of pilot error. That is very, very strange as IRL I sometimes have a LOT to do to keep straight and otherwise civilised aircraft attitude.
(Not adding that IRL I always got like very smooth 25fps, irrespective of scenery density)

AI: I feel the AI is taken straight from the old Sturmovik. Same, robotic controls (jerking it), same ignorance of aircraft limitations (try to fly Blenheim on the same settings as AI does, you blew engines in no time!), same inability to lead up properly on shooting, same collisions with terrain, same aerobatics with full laden Dorniers. I have seen it all, and there is a lot of things to correct.


The game is unfortunately very buggy and it more looks like a Betatest.
Talking about flying the Blenheim, I was very upset on myself I was not able to keep engines ticking, as these always lost power quite soon after takeoff.
I even dug a Blenheim POH outta internet and studied. The reason dumbfounded me. As the GAME was telling me I have 100% mixture in the digital levers on screen and also on engine monitor, the lever was set to "weak" in the cockpit. So I ruined at least ten sets of Mercury engines just to find out the GAME is wrong? (Not adding there shall be no smooth 0-100% mixture setting, just "weak" and "normal".) How on earth could anyone with more limited knowledge of how airplane engines work IRL find out what is wrong here? (And as there are no POH's released with the game, CEM is a sort of wizardry for common folk)

Someone here has mentioned the state in which ROF came out.
As I was a ROF betatester, I can openly claim that such mistakes were absent. The flying part of the ROF was top notch from day zero.
And comparing ROF and COD release - while ROF was released with more or less "Sorry guys, it is not ready yet, but we need to release and make some money, please support us, there is a list of to-do's" and in reality it was a very late beta, COD was released as next-gen ultimate WWII simulator being in very early beta.
And the support of customers reflect that. ROF found its supporters (I also own a majority of addon planes, just to keep them developing the offline campaign and keep a wish for an MMOWWICFS), while COD still struggles with 500 copies max ceiling on Steam.


There were my 2c, shall I have only one wish, I beg yaysayer mods to leave my opinion here before baning me for being negative.

[bongodriver]

But there are many naysayer postings on here that are still around and all say the same thing....

[nodlew]

Gee whiz. I'm a bad boy. A bad, bad boy.

But, you know, we were having a perfectly civil and decent discussion here until Cpt.Badger made his crude and insulting quasi-sexual suggestion about the "lube".

And then Oktoberfest's suggestion that anyone here views Oleg as a "God" was not flattering to the people concerned.

These comments rather interrupted the discussion and introduced the negativity that prompted my suggestions regarding what they should do with their lube and that they should pursue it as a team activity.

So don't put no guilt trip on me, buddy. They were asking for it. And I think the moderators could be forgiven allowing one instance in which someone responds to such Hecklers in a straightforward and no-nonsense fashion.

I bent my landing gear in a hard landing once.

And we will all anxiously await the patch that reworks the flight models so that the planes exactly reproduce your subjective experience of flight in whatever sort of plane you fly. At least then we will all rest easy in the knowledge that one person somewhere is completely satisfied with at least one particular aspect of the game. Mission accomplished.

Sheesh.

[WT_Schmouddle]

Nodlew - there is no need to excuse yourself. One could slip here and there.
My critisism went towards moderators, not towards you.

In my eyes (and I am a mod elswhere, too) if they got banned you should have been banned too. If you were not, they shoud have not been banned neither.

Simple as that.

[Ataros]

Check out this note from a developer:

With new engine you can create your own game inside our game, for example: you connect to server, and server sends to you completly new user interface (no restriction, but protected by sandbox, no one can read, write or modify your data that out border of game).
New GUI, new rules of game, new score system with ranks and etc.
It can do right now, anyone for their game server.
Of course you need some knowledge of scripting and design. We will assist wherever possible to all comers.
We are working to create examples.

Imagine in the future, each server will be unique, different battles on land, in air or under water, or global war :)

Anyone who knows C# and wants to write an interface, resource management, ranking and voting for commander system for an "Online war", let's discuss here http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=21518&page=6

[Skoshi Tiger]

I just come by.. and I am getting the drift..I guess

Mods here allow yaysayers to suggest naysayers to stick their head through their anus, no moderation there.
And as naysayers claim what they think is wrong, that is called negative attitude and their posts are deleted and their accounts profoundly banned.
I always thought mods are not here to herd the discussion the "righteous" way, they are supposed to be here to keep it civil, just like the Hyde Park soapbox keepers. You can talk whatever you can, but you shall not insult any other member, right?
Mods projecting their wishes about the product and baning others, that is A shame and a major no-no for an ordinary customer like me.


Bit of a rant so I won't comment.


So, to the topic:
I am a sport pilot IRL, so take my commentary with grain of salt as the only warbird I ever piloted was humble 600hp Yak11 trainer (a plane similar to Texan I guess).

Regarding visibility:
Sorry, but that's how it is, quite often, IRL. Very often you cannot see white Cessna half a km away against city or cloud or haze. In the autumn, I met a group of WWI replicas inflight and as these are brown/green they were almost invisible against the terrain, only the strobe light of accompanying microlight gave their position on about 300m. So get used to it, even a collision is a possibility.



Couldn't agree more.


Flight models:
These are, IMHO very, very gentle. Even way too gentle. IRL I am really not sure whether I would dare to fly the Spitfire of Hurricare the way I do in COD. Heck, I was able to bring Hurricane without any problems to precise 3-spot landing on the precise spot on the airfield on my first try with 19fps and heavy stutter. I have never bent any metal in COD as a result of pilot error. That is very, very strange as IRL I sometimes have a LOT to do to keep straight and otherwise civilised aircraft attitude.
(Not adding that IRL I always got like very smooth 25fps, irrespective of scenery density)


I've only about 60Hours in light planes. Cessna's and Piper's and even after some very hairy landings (so hairy that at one stage the instructor pulled me up on a touch and go landing, jumped out and told me to fly it myself! ;) ) and even I can say I've never bent a real airplane.

I haven't tried to land hard on purpose, maybe I'll give it a go next time to see?




The game is unfortunately very buggy and it more looks like a Betatest.
Talking about flying the Blenheim, I was very upset on myself I was not able to keep engines ticking, as these always lost power quite soon after takeoff.
I even dug a Blenheim POH outta internet and studied. The reason dumbfounded me. As the GAME was telling me I have 100% mixture in the digital levers on screen and also on engine monitor, the lever was set to "weak" in the cockpit. So I ruined at least ten sets of Mercury engines just to find out the GAME is wrong? (Not adding there shall be no smooth 0-100% mixture setting, just "weak" and "normal".) How on earth could anyone with more limited knowledge of how airplane engines work IRL find out what is wrong here? (And as there are no POH's released with the game, CEM is a sort of wizardry for common folk)


I can't ever remember refering to mixture as 100%. It's always been rich or lean. Most of the British planes in the sim go against modern convention with rich being to the rear of the cockpit and lean to the front. With two positions possible I wouldn't call it a bug that it operates as it did in real life. However the little sliders on the screen look is irrelevent. I've have it hooked up to a rocker switch, so the matches the animation on the screen.



Someone here has mentioned the state in which ROF came out.
As I was a ROF betatester, I can openly claim that such mistakes were absent. The flying part of the ROF was top notch from day zero.
And comparing ROF and COD release - while ROF was released with more or less "Sorry guys, it is not ready yet, but we need to release and make some money, please support us, there is a list of to-do's" and in reality it was a very late beta, COD was released as next-gen ultimate WWII simulator being in very early beta.


Your experience with ROF differs significantly with mine. On my current computer ROF it was unplayable at its first release. Only after I upgraded to a Quad core and newer graphics card did I get acceptable frame rate. I haven't noticed a major performance increase with the ROF patches. I have in COD.

Name one other WWII Combat flight sim that does it better?



And the support of customers reflect that. ROF found its supporters (I also own a majority of addon planes, just to keep them developing the offline campaign and keep a wish for an MMOWWICFS), while COD still struggles with 500 copies max ceiling on Steam.



Although very buggy, my few multiplayer missions in COD have been amazingly immersive trying to cope with CEM and temperature effects, while trying to find a target and get into a position to attack. Gameplay and visuals blows any other online sim I've played away bar none. It's that good!


There were my 2c, shall I have only one wish, I beg yaysayer mods to leave my opinion here before baning me for being negative.

I don't think you've been that negative, you haven't been rude and stated your opinion! There is nothing wrong with that.

[nodlew]

In my eyes (and I am a mod elswhere, too) if they got banned you should have been banned too. If you were not, they shoud have not been banned neither.

I don't think they were banned for making one inflammatory statement. I think they were probably banned for making a general nuisance of themselves, and the moderators have the right to decide who is a nuisance and who isn't. When I make a total ass of myself to the detriment of the forum itself, I'm sure they will promptly ban me too.

[BigPickle]

Straight talk... There is no one currently developing any WW2 air combat flight simulation genre of game for the PC. You, I and the rest of our enthusiastic membership have absolutely no choice for anything better than we have with anyone else. Every WW2 air combat simulation game for the PC is over 8 years old, and there is only one that meets the needs of our users... IL2. Without a BOB COD there is nothing, and there will be nothing for a very long time without the BOB COD.

I get your point nearmiss, about just being still on the negative aspects for now till they can get them sorted, but I also have to say that this part above sounds like a "held to ransom" statement, especially when the main reason why people might feel slighted is because they have paid money for a porduct they feel very passionate about.
But still i do agree that not every post people make should be a total downer, and also i do heavily agree that people should not under any circumstances insult others including the developers.
Its one thing being negative and pessamistic and another being insulting.

[WT_Schmouddle]

I've only about 60Hours in light planes. Cessna's and Piper's and even after some very hairy landings (so hairy that at one stage the instructor pulled me up on a touch and go landing, jumped out and told me to fly it myself! ;) ) and even I can say I've never bent a real airplane.

I haven't tried to land hard on purpose, maybe I'll give it a go next time to see?


So, we got similar flying time logged. (Very expensive hobby, don't you think, being an alcoholic must be...cheaper)
Well, majority of my landings are in awesome category of yours, sure, but had some nasty aswell, usualy with gusty crosswind. Remember one time just as I was bleeding airspeed prior to touchdown, you know, came a 10knot gust from nowehere...had a too little bank for crosswind and as it blew unsymetricaly it put me into 30° opposite bank, being too slow (70kmh) for full deflected ailerons to keep me level I just put full opposite rudder and firewalled the engine. Got outta that and REALLY watched my crosswind bank on next approach.




I can't ever remember refering to mixture as 100%. It's always been rich or lean. Most of the British planes in the sim go against modern convention with rich being to the rear of the cockpit and lean to the front. With two positions possible I wouldn't call it a bug that it operates as it did in real life. However the little sliders on the screen look is irrelevent. I've have it hooked up to a rocker switch, so the matches the animation on the screen.

Yeah I got that on my Saitek Throttle Quadrant, which is more like a real airplane, no matter that there are actually only to usable positions. There are no rocker switches for misture in Blenheim, there are levers.

But still it puzzles me.
Having the mixture lever on throttle quadrant fully froward shows 100% of mixture in the GAME, yet it is 0% in the SIM and shall be reported as WEAK.
I really do not understand, how it is possible the GAME (aka layers over the simulation part) reports opposite what is being set and done in SIM. GAME reports 100% mixture, but the SIM counts with 0% and applies CEM damage models.

So it is like having thrust levers in Boeing reversed, with aft position actually being zero thrust, but the MFD's engine section would read 100% thrust.


Confusing for me, really, but I do not have 300 pax behind my seat.




Your experience with ROF differs significantly with mine. On my current computer ROF it was unplayable at its first release. Only after I upgraded to a Quad core and newer graphics card did I get acceptable frame rate. I haven't noticed a major performance increase with the ROF patches. I have in COD.
Name one other WWII Combat flight sim that does it better?


I am sorry to hear that, but on my current rig the first release of ROF was playable on quite high settings (they fiddled with that, too) and I enjoyed good framerates ingame. (X4 -4 Gigs Ram- NV 260OC)

The difference between ROF and COD is, ROF had high demands to run on high settings, but it actualy ran in very, very good framerates without stuttering etc. It was also quite scalable and on lesser rigs was able to run decently. I know there was an issue with dualcores but I do not remember the reason. Anyway, during the betatest none of our squadmates with dualcores reported any issue.

That could not be said about COD, sorry to say. With my rig and medium settings, I had avg 19fps with heavy stutter in the release version.



Although very buggy, my few multiplayer missions in COD have been amazingly immersive trying to cope with CEM and temperature effects, while trying to find a target and get into a position to attack. Gameplay and visuals blows any other online sim I've played away bar none. It's that good!


I am mainly an offliner, and there is not much progress from IL-2. I already spoke about the AI being more like AD, I do not thoroughly enjoy the FM (as I do in ROF), because I feel it is too easy, CEM is a bit of dissapointement for me as there are no POH's and I need to refer to other pilots while guessing what is right and what is wrong.
Anyway, whole CEM in Spits and Hurrics is down to not overrevving and/or overboost the engine. Pretty simple, at the end. (But I need to admit, I am not a casual simmer, I know how these system works and what happens to the machine when the sorry ape in cockpit thrusts this yellow lever here)



I don't think you've been that negative, you haven't been rude and stated your opinion! There is nothing wrong with that.


Thanks.

[jibo]

WT_Schmouddle
your statements are wise and respectful to the team work,
those who were banned were basically calling for an end of 1c as a company and relentlessly trashing it which is unacceptable.
There is plenty of room for useful inputs and the team is glad to read them.

[proton45]

Guys, your God Oleg is OUT OF THE HOUSE. He LEFT THE BUILDING. OLEG is no more. It has ceased to be a developper of this thing ! He's not working on this sim anymore. Can you get it ???

Your such an angry little thing...aren't you? ;)