Oleg Maddox's Room #2 QUESTIONS & REQUESTS TO OLEG ABOUT BOB SOW

[Forgottenfighter]

... A New Oleg Maddox's Room -

I think that it has become too time consuming to scroll through the 187 pages of Oleg Maddox's Room in search for answers. People keep posting the same questions because they haven't time to read the 1860 posts in Oleg Maddox's Room. So, I compiled a list of all the answered questions, along with the relevant answers. That way it will be easier for everyone to find answers, and easier for Oleg because people won't keep asking the same questions.


1) Can we expect some kind of list regarding add-ons and changes implemented in the final 4.09 patch ?Only when it will be ready. But now I can say that changes thare will be minimal, becasue of absolutely no time.

2) I would like it if Oleg could address the issue of countering the recent spate of hacks for 4.08, and to tell us what plans he has (if any) to once again lock down the game and combat those who would seek to open up the code.Probably there will be only very minimal changes. See answer above.

3) I remember Oleg saying way back that there would be AI available in Dogfight servers.
I wonder if the game had got onto testing Mutliplayer yet?In BoB - Yes.

4) My question is if SOW gives you the possibility in offline mode to start your mission in Hangars or Parking possitions? And if so will there be the possibilty to give the aircraft rolling waypoints on the ground?It will be possible in offline and in online. But for AI will be standard constant waypoints for parking (in hangar also)

5) Can you tell us about any new features in BOB that we don't know about?
So far, we know of dynamic weather and 6DOF...any surprises to come?
What does the future hold for IL2? If you stop further work on it, will the community be able to add content to it in the future?
What are your thoughts on the recently debated sound mod/hack?
I have a seperate post asking about the availability of any IL2 merchandise...is there any available?
If not, are there plans to do some merchandising?There will be many surprises in time. Like with Il-2 we put in engine many things that will be open later later depending of middle PC power on the market.
With 4.09 we will stop any work with Il-2. Really we did it already... just waiting finalization of new maps.

6) I'm wondering if it will be possible to give pilots separate AI. That in a way a squadron is a good mix of rookie, experienced, veteran and ace pilots.

It will be in BoB. Already is in current code of BoB.

7) Will there be an in-game multiplayer session browser and chat room?
Following in the same vein, has there ever been plans or an idea to have a centralized skins server?I would tell right now how will be origanized menus, details of multiplayer, etc. We don't need centralized skins server due to used technology.

8)Will the mission data files (.mis) be simple text as now? Or XML...?text

9) My question is: on what operatiing system SOW-BOB will run?
Will it be based on OpenGl as Il2 was or DirectX?
Will it be DirectX9 or 10? Or both?OpenGl - still main.

10) When can we see some SoW updates with vids and sounds?
Will 4.09 have new sounds? Seems it might discourage hacking.Sounds of BoB only when beta will be on the runway.
No new sounds in 4.09.

11) Will the offline campaigns and missions be fully developed? or will you rely more on third party community involvement than you did in the Il2 franchise?
Will there be more programmable camera views and options for the movie makers?missions will be done fully inside company.
Camera views will be expanded

12) Will players be able to fly any heaavy bombers in SoW.
Will SOW have some sort of fuel rearm and repair option.
Will SoW have historic ground battles WITH infantary.No heavy bomber in BoB. They wasn't there at the period of time which we model.
Fuel rearm - will be. Repair - some sort.
No battles with infantry. We are doing flight sim.

13) Do you have any plans to, or interest in including the Hampden in SoW BoB??

14) And to avoid useless work for theses fans, is the french planes welcome in BoB or future realease?In future possible

15) Will there be ground crew and vehicles arming and fueling the planes?Some kind.

16) AI: will the AI situational awareness of AI pilots and gunners (also ship and land gunners) be subjected to sunlight blinding?Some kind You all would like to much and too early

17) Also any possibility of making also Linux version of BoB ?No.

18) Has it been decided if you will release the 3D tools to 3rd party dev's?It is our plan. But after release.

19) What is the purpose of the opening doors in the aircraft models?
What differences can we expect in the user interface?
What aspects of BoB will be customizable and what aspects will be closed?
Will SoW take advantage of the latest Sound Cards?
What will be the maximum number of pilots on a single server?Too many questions. Will answer just one. Openable door we need for visuals and future updates of features .
Sound - we alwasy use the most advanced sound cards that to get binaural sound.

20) What are the minimum and recommended hardware specs?
What is a likely release date?I can't answer right now exact things. Better to do not buy now new hardware... and wait release or final anounce with specs.

21) Is there any chance to give us a persistent multiplayer server in BoB? I mean an arena like server.
thanks in advance.At the moment I can't say will we support dedicaded server ourselves or it will again distibuted fro free. And we will have new modes for multiplay

22) QOUTE{Regarding your answers on the sound patch, just so I can be sure I understand..

1. Your team is NOT GOING TO release an OFFICIAL SOUND PATCH in 4.09,... due to lack of time.

2. Your team will DO NOTHING TO STOP the New sound hacks use,... due to lack of time.

3. Your team will NOT PUT FORTH THE EFFORT to add a more realistic sound to Sow there for... NO GREAT IMPROVEMENT FOR SOUNDS IN SOW. <- Why not?. }QOUTE
- all work dedicated to BoB, no? all this sound stuff/wav files is no doubt time consuming to gather, integrate to a certain level of ingame fidelity et al, unless you're willing to rip off copyrighted soundfiles from somewhere? which of course cannot be done if you're a company as opposed to some hacker kiddy, no? pretty good reasons...

i dunno - the sound was never really that brilliant, granted. but it did the job of letting you know when your engine's about to conk out, or if you're running at too high rev's, you know - the important things. sounding *exactly* like a merlin thats flown so many hours is not something that registers as important... losing control surfaces in a 900kph dive, yeah thats important, rattling pistons comes waaaaay down the list

edit - 3. Your team will NOT PUT FORTH THE EFFORT to add a more realistic sound to Sow there for... NO GREAT IMPROVEMENT FOR SOUNDS IN SOW. um yeah he actually said "Sounds of BoB [will be heard]only when beta will be on the runway.
No new sounds in 4.09. nothing about sound quality in BoB[/i]That to make it clear:

In BoB there is absolutley new sound engine. Maybe in Il-2 sound samples wasn't so good for the cheap speakers, but the 3D bunaural engine of sound there is still the best.

And I don't undesrant why to repeat me... Lack of time means that we are busy with new sim. Completely new. This means time, forces and funds. I don't see if there could be any additional questions why or so...

23) Oleg i understand that were are not heavy bomber in BOB, but i hope this time all Airplane implemented in this game will be pilotable.Impossible to make them pilotable (on our slang - flyable).
1. Not for all is even possible to find sources that to make them looks like real. With the more great quality of modelling in new sim this point is going to be even more stronger than in IL-2.
2. now flyable aircraft, i.e developemtn of aircraft, cockpit of fighter take at least 4-6 months... I don't speak about bombers, which are more complex and have more internal seats to model with enviroument... So if you will make simple calculation and with take equal time for each aircraft you may get many-many years of developemtn only 30-40 aircraft in one small development studio.
3. We will release special tools for third party that will allow to include third party aircraft or new cocmpits... But it will be not like the chaos in MS... it will be by other way and no chaos in online. The new system. But tools - some time after the reelase of BoB itself... So the most advanced third party developers sure will make all flyable or will make completely new things... Simply this i shouldn't tell now in details. Some solutions are secret


24) About FM itself...I've heard about various effects of weather on the plane, but is(I'm pretty sure it is but I hope for some details ) FM itself further improved from present il2 state?
I've heard rumors that we will literary have to learn to fly from scratch...Pilot: Ebven charachter of pilot will be modelled. Fatigue as well.

50 Lb is really for two hands as a midle force with which possible to pilot aircraft still in the frame that to do not chrash...

FM isn't the thing that you need to learn again. Some differences in complex situations... but in general fly the same or very close to what is. It will be different in details and more adjustable for different aircaraft types.

25) I was wondering if changing the view position using 6DOF will move the pilot's body as well? In real life pilots often tried to hide behind the airplanes engine when attacking bombersYes a bit. In a limit of the belts. But with options of complexity probably.

26) Regarding 4.09:

Can u assure us that there is a check on the il2fb.exe so people that havn't original version cant join online sessions?First off all, that to make new check for that we need simply to rewrite too many things, icluding even file structure. It is simply impossible to make such a great job when we are totally busy with BoB...
I can't promise now... but my guys in research what is possible by minimal human/month busy schedule...
Say "Thanks" guys who did it... and who do not understand what they did for online community...

27) Will radio navigation be included and what maps will you have in game?Yes. Map is one. And probably several small special online maps.

28) Will icing on the wings be considered?Probably. It is in our plan, but not in major priority.

29) WHAT will change on the engine (and fuel) management side?I can say that there _will_ be changes.

30) In BoB will we be able to identify and located planes, trucks, tanks from the correct distances when looking out of the cockpit of our aircraft ?I do think it will depending of the power of your home computer. The system of LODs it totally new.

31) Will there be a Damage Model more precise (I remember some sayings about that), and which will be sensible to the time, or the G for exemple ? I mean, when my wing is hitted I cannot take too much G, and if I do, the damage spread and I can break my wing more easily.Will be. But I wont say all things now.

32) What about shaders in game, how that would be used, and what about HDR lighting, will some sort of that will be used?I don't discuss technology terms. Many things already is, many will be.
Shaders we use very much in Il-2

33) Just a quick question regarding the size of the map. I believe that you have stated, that the map will cower to the north of London, but how much of France or Belgium will be modeled? Will German bombers be able to takeoff from inland bases or do they simply spawn in the air?No Germany. The map is too detailed that to make it even greater than we will have.

34) In IL2 almost all on-line pilots forced to fly at low resolutions (1024x768 usually) for best view (ground HQ at 8000m ), in Bob:SOW this problem continue?.Fist time I read such... Really I know other picture...

35) In IL2 with some configurations you're capable ear sounds of others planes, explosions at ten milles... (whitout last shit cheats). Host in SOW has option of configurate sound for all players? (as one swith "real sound")This means incorrect configurations of sound panning. And simple panning of some cheapest sound cards its own drivers... In Bob we are going by other eway and have own panning, instead of manufacture driver's panning.

36) I would like to ask if we can expect better Force Feedback support in SoW? It would be great to have better immersion of flying.Really any real pilot would say you that what called FF on Joystick has nothing common with real situation.... Really they woukld say you that without that FF would be more correct comparing to real life...
I don't know what we will have with FF... But probably this item will be open in source code for third party development.

37) Awhile back there was some talk about a trainer aircraft for Bob.....my question is if this is true, would it also be possible to take the co-pilot seat in any of the games bomber's during on-line play......the co-pilot could do trim, or take over if the pilot is killedTrue. What will be in online modes in terms of this question I will not tell till final. Its a big secret at the moment.

38) Any plans to include the Dewoitine D.520??? (It’s formidable little fighter with nose-mounted 20mm Hispano (+ 4 MGs) - comparable to bf109E for potency/performance (apart from direct fuel-injection)...We - not. But third party will be able to do it in time themselves.

39) Can it be possible to have planes explode more realistically when ground pounded? Currently they turn black and simply lean to the left or right.I do think that in Il-2 the most realistic explosions on the market of the sims.. In BoB will be better.

40) Will BOB have similar support for the 3 Views option currently used in Il-2 for multi-monitor support? This is the Use3Renders option.Probably. Hwever it isn't in a list of first things to be developed.

41) Will wings visibly flex? (Or even just the effects?)When we will have in future the planes where it is visible in reality – probably yes. But say on Ju-88 – it is invisible (at least in flight with high G for sure)

42) Will any tweaking be made to multiplayer support that may take over Hyperlobby, and support ladders?Will be new multiplayer code.

43) Will there be a drop down window for coops so we can save server address ?Probably. But by another way.

44) Are we able to choose exactly what type of ammunition we want for our ammunition belts? What I mean is can we choose the types of bullets that we want. If we want to load Gun 1 with all HE and Gun 2 with all Tracer, or no Tracer and Gun 3 with 4 AP and 1 Tracer, or 2 AP and 3 Tracer etc. If we could custom load each ammo belt, this would really open up a lot of possibilities for the virtual pilot.It will depending of mission. And limits defined on server.

45) Oleg, will you improve how overheating is modeled in BOBThe complex model of engine work is more advanced.

46) Can we have more realistic vision effect for high G (loose peripheral vision)?I do think we have the most realistic for the computer visualisation.

47) I would really like to know how the briefing / debriefing will look like and what info from mission will it contain (offline and online). If not secret maybe some pictures ?Next year will show maybe.

48) Is the flyable plane set completely decided on, (including different marks of planes we already know), or not yet?Completely decided. Don’t ask too much. Because maybe some of them could be removed and later coming in add-ons

49) Will SoW take advantage of multi-core setups, dual or even quads?Will

50) Centrifical force- will this be modelled in BoB?

Example: a wing gets shot off: the resulting G-forces on the pilot may be such to keep them pinned (and disoriented) in the cockpit.The same as like if one has many coins in a sock that one spins around keeps them from coming out the open end.Maybe. If you mean centrifugal force

51) I can see that doors of Br-20 aircraft are openable - does it means, that the pilot would be able to go through the doors, to get in to the aircraft, or to get out of the aircraft?Maybe in future. Engine in principle allow it

52) I was wondering about a few aspects of mission building for BoB SoW...will we have options (or AI features) like: if Stuka raid fails to remove "radar" tower(s) RAF fighter intercept will find targets (German bombers) quicker? or If AI fighter runs out of ammo he must return to base to reload?Radars will play right role. Reload planned at the moment for online gameplay.

53) Will cloud's provide inviability from the AI?Yes.

54) Will AI fighters have a blind spot (below)?Yes. But not a spot. Some area.

55) Will we be able to program "campaign's" with options concerning supply (if factory or truck convoys destroyed repairs can not be made)Too early question

56) Will we be able to surprise AI defense with tricks like low altitude attack? (like a tree top approtch)Yes. Some time in some places.

57) Will we be able to design missions in campaign mode where we have to make command decisions that will effect out come of future actions? (example: if we split our bombers into 2 groups and bomb and airfield and a sea-port at the same time, some RAF fighters will be called away to defend the first (closer) air-strike and the second German raid will meet smaller defense? But if all bombers attack one airfield they have a more difficult defense?)Can’t answer it now.

58) Will we be able to kill AI gunners in bombers and/or will they run out of ammo?It is in IL-2.

59) WILL WE be able to build maps?Yes. But only small. Big maps we will keep for ourselves that to release new series of sims.

60) Will there be different versions of the Bf-109 E? E-1, E-3, E4 or E-7 /B?E-1 – Sure no.

61) Will it be possible to fly in different formations? Like the Schwarm and Vic? And be able as a flightcommander to change formation and spacing between planes inflight?Try in Il-2. In BoB it is improved.

62) Will it look more realistic when a pilot bails out of his plane? In Il-2 the pilot sometimes goes through the plane when he bails out in the air, on the ground he exits the cockpit by jumping 3 meters straight up in the air and in water he run instead of swimming. Will this be modeled more realistic in SOW:BOB?Can’t answer it now. Maybe in time. It is complex animation of pilot at first…

63) Will your plane crash if you fly into a tree?In Il-2 we have two types of trees - with collision model and without. These that are without are graphical feature and loads with maximum settings. It was don that to make equal gameplay of players with different power of their PC and its settings. In BoB we will have only type with collision model.

64) [Regarding damaged Spitfire screenshots] Nice pic's. I never saw how looks in combat damaged aircraft, but for me looks more like spit was flying under big drops of concentrated acid rain instead that got damages from bullets with huge kinetic energy. I don't know. Maybe damage from flak looks exactly like this. Anyway detail is wery high.Probably you'll never see such many big holes at once, like on these pics of Spitfire. And it isn't due to hits of bullets. It is due to flak and hits of shells.
From bullets we will "draw" actual(exact) places of hits. This you will see not so soon and already in the 3D engine together with other types of damage.
Main was to show missibg in flight aerodynamic panels of engine, etc.. It wasn't so rare in real aerial combat.


For us is a great task how to make a lot of details and at the same time to render a lot of aircraft in air simultaniosly.... So all things will be optimized for this...
Say it is possible to make even greater details of damage, aircraft itself , etc... but probably in case of hundreds aircraft in action around you you will need the PC that will be existed only say ten years after release
Hope you all understand what the tasks we have and what the technical problems are on our board...
The is no problem to make increadible amount of polygons in aircraft (or ground units), but then will follow problem of PC power, when in air isn't just one aircraft.... When the water is trasparent, when the clouds looks like real and moving, etc...
BoB will be again a "fight of compromises" in technologies and will offer the best compromises that wioll be usable for many years ahead, like it was with Il-2

65) I have a question about the DM. Is the visual damage in the same place you hit? In IL2, you have a very general visual damage. It shows you hit the wing, but not where exactly on the wing, or how bad other then light and heavy. How will BoB's visual DM differ? Or will it use the same general IL2 DM system?In General it is advanced mix of old and new technologies. See my answer above that to understand.
And in Il-2, when it was born - nobody in industry had such "very general" Attemps of others was...

66) Great to see a few more screenshots.
The detail in these models is superb.
Are all aircraft, including AI types, being done to a similar level of detail?
Are all aircraft modelled with similar level of airframe detail to the Spitfire images?
When parts fly off can they hit following aircraft and cause damage?
Will the "damage" to aircrew be modelled as realistically as damage to the aircraft or will "gore" effects be toned down?
When bailing out from a bomber will the pilot be able to stay at the controls to give the crew more chance to escape before he bails out?gore effects will be toned down. It is marketing principle that to get 12+ rating. We have small niche of market and we need to listen what this market tell us...

For all other questions I would say yes on 98%.

67) Could you state your feeling on the hack mod issue. i and others would like to know your thought's on this and what it means for the future?I personally hate any hack that may damage fair online gameplay.

68) Yes, I get the point about PC power......that's why I am waiting to the very last minute before I upgrade after SOW BOB comes out. I'm going to have to invest in cooling systems as well I fear. I thought that those (big) holes in the wings could only be from cannon shells.
Only 92 days to go if the date does not change again...........92 days of hell (in the cooler!!)......I'd better get that little rubber ball out again!
Best regards,
Pike.Yes... better to wait with upgrade of PC if the BoB is the main in your mind. I still don't know midlle and lowest hardware that to run BoB smooth. Will know finally in spring or even more close to summer.

69) If you have a moment, there are two ideas that I thought I would pass on:

1.
Is there any thought about being able to get (or to turn on automatic) verbal instructions from other crew members?

For example:
- The navigator could estimate TAS from IAS for the bombardier
- The rear gunner could yell out the approach of an enemy fighter to the bomber pilot (or complain about being to closs to flak).
- A radar operator could give instructions to the pilot (most aircraft had separate radar operators)

This could all be done with a few pre-recorded audio samples from the AI or simply through text on the screen.

In real life very few aircraft prior to the late 1950s had the pilot operate the radar. For some of the aircraft in Galba and all of the aircraft in BoB the radar operator could be modeled simply as a set of verbal commands. I remember accounts of interactions between luftwaffe radar operators and pilots when chaff was first being deployed and it should be possible to even model weaknesses and countermeasures verbally.

Such as system could, at least in the text overlay, be extended to visual observation (with descriptions of the rough number of enemies or ground targets and their types) with varying degrees of vagueness depending on range/conditions.

2.
As for stories, I am sure that you already see the benefit of having a well written briefing and an atmospheric plot given the Il-2 expansion packs you developed. The briefing may only be text but they add a lot.

I agree with your statements that adding a cut-scene capability to the game is largely a waste of time but for static campaigns why not expand the text based system? My suggestion would be to add the ability to choose between different text options during the briefing. These options would add additional briefing text or activate scripts to make small changes in the upcoming mission.

This would allow campaign builders to give the player the ability to do things like:
- choose between questions to ask during a briefing
- suggest a wingmen needs to be grounded for some rest (effecting their AI level or number of aircraft in upcoming missions)

S!

P.S. Could the HUD log (text overlay) be made editable for the 3rd party (so that we can make it use less jarring text and a smaller font for instance)?I will take in mind about IAS to TAS in Bomber. It should be some small and not complex... Say recorded for the correct speed just one phrase... Becasue for different speeds, different planes, if to make complex speech - this will be thousand variations of wave files.... And it would be not possible in our case due to other big work over speeches and various of localisations...

70) An idea to increase client's base and sell more copies of BOB

- Weak point of combat flight sim games: learning curve = long time to get some fun. In particular the shooting is long and difficult to master

- Result: the less motivated quit the game and also the genre

- Remedy: improve the training section of BOB. Put in some training aids, for instance a predictive "virtual pipper", kinda of a coloured dot to show where to aim with the real collimator. This would help a lot to develop the deflection shooting, and be a fun in itself. Add also the hit% statistics as in CFS. It's great for training.Correct automatically moveable point to show you right place ot hit that to get enemy aircraft in movement will be present. But ofcourse it will be swichable in difficulty settings and on the server.
Training also will be absolutely new. Including online training

71) Oleg can we get an update of SOW before Christmas please!It is. Posted right now.

72) Oleg,another question! Earlier this year you came to the UK with Ilya for the flight sim conference at Birmingham.Do you have any plans to appear in Europe again soon?Can't say you now. Maybe.

73) That server admin be able to add additionnal skin (on the server side) that could be downloaded (and saved) on the player side for future use.

This wouls add to the number of skins available in a given server. These could be saved in a server specific folder (could be the server I.P.). This would means that eache server (and player) "default" skins would increase with time... and no loading screen freeze would happend (over time) as everybody will eventually have the new skins on their hard drive... Also having specific server folder would prevent having to different skins with the same file name from being copied over....This feature is present in Il-2. Except that on dedicated server. Each new skin downloaded automaticall stored on user PC... and then never downloads again if the same player plays with you with the same skin on his side. There is system of check and identification that is way more complex and that works better than you ask.

74) Oleg, what is going on with 4.09 ?? what is the delay ?When we will have window to complete 4.09. It may happen only when we will finish one of our milestones for BoB. Currently all are too busy.

75) Are you planning to implement some kind of option, feature (more elaborate that the arcade mode on IL2) to help with gunnery?There will be an option of difficulty settings: Special marker will show you the point where you should shoot. This marker will show optimal forestall place(point) where you should put your bullets (before, over, etc ).

76) It was allready stated, that SoW:BoB will run with high details on a system that runs IL2-1946 at high details, too. Even more than with the IL2-Engine there are certain options, that will become finished and available as the product evolves and hardware meets the specifications needed.

IMHO this is the best way to please all sides of the market.

No... My statement was that Bob _will_run_ on the system on which now Il-2 series run at highest detail... But it doesn't means that it will run on high detail on that system... This means that probably it will be lowest settings...

77) Effects=2 enables more 3-dimensional looking smoke and explosions. Very nice to look at, but a huge hit on your performance. As Oleg posted again and again: Wait until BoB is released, if you consider an upgrade for BoB. Who knows what hardware will be available then... Correct in terms if you don't play any other games... or waiting for other games that will be released more early than BoB.
Anyway, I personally plan to upgrage my home PC only _after_ release of BoB.

78) Good to hear from you Oleg and good to hear the Alpha is under way. Could you comment a little bit on IL2: Birds of Prey? Could you give us some hints how it will compare with SOW?We are not busy with Birds of Prey project. It is third party project under control of 1C. We just gave them full source code and did neccessary consultations.
It looks good, but not like BoB engine. BoB engine it is not modification of Il-2 engine.
Also I tested periodically BoP and would like to say that the contol of aircraft there and FM isn't like in all arcade sim-games, but control aircraft is more easy than in arcade sims... becasue the guys keeping some original physics from Il-2.

Hope I did right answers for all the buzz around it

79) I have just read your answer about the linking of SOW with the Korean project...
Very interesting. Also noticed you mentioned a WW1 sim, would this be KOTS or is it another project altogether and if so, how many years down the line would that be?

Lastly Theatre of war used the IL2 engine to great effect, are their plans for a theatre of war using the SOW engine (is it capable) and the big question.
WW2-Online was an attempt to make the perfect complete simulation for WW2. Would the SOW engine be able to do what WW2 Online failed at?I told just about possible ways. I'm personall plan to expand the WWII and finally in that series also to model Russian front as well on new level.
The next after BoB we plan to make the area that never yet modelled And it should go on the market after BoB during a year or so.
But the first our target after BoB - to release the Enduser tools that allow them to incorporate new planes, ground vechicles, ships, etc into a sim as a system. We would like to create some industry around it, like it is around MS FS. It is stron point of MS FS on the market. However we understand the problems with such way and we are doinf it with the target of no cheating online. Some time more close to release later I will tell it in all details.
This will be someting new on the market.

In BoB intial release we will have controlable stationary AA guns. You may play for them in online or even in sigle play if you wish to create such a mission. This will a first step in realisation of our plans for online gameplay. In a touch with writen above you may imagine what can do with only this feature some crative third party developers.
Tools will alow to "program" by simple ways such objects (aircraft also). But again plase read with attention - this will not kill online. There will be some sort of protection.

We don't plan to copy WWIIOL. But if we will decide to go for only online gameplay, then we can use BoB engine.

80) Well, Guild Wars didn't really invent that, you know?

If I may remind you, it was another game that gave you the option to either buy addons and run them as standalone or to install them merged with your previous versions of the game. And that was years before GW was released. The name of the Game was IL2FB IIRC - As it was quite successful I see no reason to change that way of distribution. We'll buy them all anyway - LOL

IMHO you, Oleg, and your team did a really, really great job with IL2 and from the mere tidbits of informations released, I can imagine there's a great time coming for us simulations-fans once BoB is released. That's honestly the reason why I have no problem waiting - all good things are worth waiting for.As more compex coding, more complex AI in terms of features, precise of models comparing to original real planes, we need more time to spend for development. And if we want the new jump of technoloiges, visuals, damage, FM, common physics, etc in one product united all in one with some compromises that will be acceptable for many years ahead, like we did years ago with the release of Il-2, we need more time. Real time of full development from intial to final code of Il-2 was 7+ years. And 5 years success on the market. To repeat it very hard... even more hard to jump over our own heads.
I'm the guy, who dislike to create one time good thing then wait when this good thing will be worse then new others... from others. I'm the guy who like to get always only good. So I would like top get in BoB many things that isn't in any sim in features, etc... or in any possible competitors in future (At least I hope )
Somebody told here that why we are doing the planes that didn't play role in the war... It is incorect opinion. Each plane played some role. And each plane that we model is important part of history and GAMEPLAY for single play. It is also important for users that like to make themselves some episodes of airwar that we or others never covered in a flightsim. Also this will make the sim unique comparing to all other BoBs before. If you'll look for years back, you may se that with original Il-2 was really the same situation ...
Or you don't like to try to fly military autogyro for recon or for the tunings of radar and trying to escape attacks of bf109s? I can give you a guarantie that it will be for many people very interesting and to feell the things that was never experinced before.... Just little sample... Only when you pay attention to such "outside of main picture" detail the product might be interesting for all.

In short:
We try to make the BoB that will be not like all BoBs before on a sim market...
we try to make not the single one time released game, but the series of expansions... that will work like Pacific Fighters in the past... stand alone or merged with previous release, begining from BoB.

81) Hello Oleg , as one Of my main interests in il2 is making movies I am wondering what kind of , if any , recording (placeable cameras) and play back facillities have you got planned for BOB , sorry if this question has already bin asked and answered I can't tell you finally how many types of cameras, but will be more features than in Il-2 and more useful.
Recording will be possible in two formats one of them is similar to NTRK, another - ready video, but still under question in which format finally.
But only NTRK will be possible to use for full HD video conversion.

82) Oleg sir, are you still in any of those countries? Oleg sir, do you have a publisher for SOW? Oleg sir, is the BOB: SOW actually a dead project?Everything still is fine. Simply summer and I took finally vacation... Usually they were too short in the past or wasn't in principle.

83) AFAIK planes will have both bump (normal) maps and specular maps as well. Somewhere I've read about it.Right.

84) Oleg, could you please tell me if the Sunderland is a flyable aircraft or AI. Many thanks for the update!AI, But we are making as well these AI model the same quality as flyable. And we will offer tools for advanced third party developer that to make any plane flyable without us...

So I expect that there will be many flyables later after the intial release... and BoB will be growing even more than Il-2 series

85) Hello Oleg , just wanted to say , the update of the flight models is about what I expected , what Has impressed me though is the new texture of the grass , if this is an indication of the new map to come , I cant wait , I know from what youve said theres a long way to go , but still ... I cant wait.This temporary made texture is for tools. In the sim the grass is 3D and moving due the wind.

[Forgottenfighter]

86) Oleg, is the Flight Model finished for BoB, or still a work in progress "Beta" stage? Can you update us on the status of 4.09m final ? Thanks

In General finished. But we didn't tune for each aircraft well yet.

4.09 still don't know when. My guys really to busy that to switch back to Il-2 even for some time.

87) You are speaking about a "new engine".
What do you mean with this?
Starting all over again with all objects?

"the final release…. Which isn’t soon really…. "

So we have to wait for September 2009 ???

New engine means the absolutely new 3D engine, ground fhysics and flight coding, AI and even how it looks in general.... Simply everything....
There is only experinece of Il-2 development behind, but the 90+% of code is completely new. The other 10% also with changes.


88) Dear Oleg
In the past you have refered to multi-manned positions in at least the Tigermoth trainer and if I am not mistaken the bombers as well.
1. That I still hope holds true. My question is will your fellow crew members be modeled.
IE if I am the pilot of a J88 will I be able to see an animated rendering of my front gunner as in the current H111 or will I be flying an empty plane as is the current state of affairs.

2. As you seem to have entered the early Alpha stage I was wondering if you have any idea what sort of system will be needed to get the best out of SOW?

3. Without giving too much away, is there anything in the sim that will truly rock our socks-off. By this I mean, either something us simmers have never seen before or something that is of a standard so high other developers will spend years catching up
And by this I do not mean the graphics, as they are already out of this world I am refering to any snippet of news about the actual sim.

4. Your ground models seem almost online of war-ish capable and I am sure a ground war and air war could be seemlessly created, would this be possible?

5. Lastly will the player have the opportunity to strategically direct the air war in say an improved BOB2 type interface in single player or will their role be restricted to only flying within a dynamic environment?

1. It isn't finally decided. We have some part of code ready for animation of pilots and crew, but it will depends how much time we will have that to spend our resources for that. Can't say in 100% yes. If there will be no room for that work we will drop it for the next title release of SoW series.

2. Even at Beta isn't possible to define finally required sys. specs. For the best out of BoB probably there will be no such PC on the market at release... like it was with the first release of Il-2.... However eve without best out it will looks superb. Simply we should think about future becasue we plan for SoW series long life, not less than for Il-2 sries, if not more. We plan to make series that will cover agin Il-2 modelled battles as well as some never modelled in any game...

3. I hope everythng from the general graphics to the gameplay, from Ai to the FM, from the sky to the ground... as well as never seen before some of gameplay features, like it was offered with the first Il-2.... At the time of Il-2 release there were some many features that was release in a game for the first time in world in princile. Many others copied ideas from Il-2...

4. With the release of BoB there will be player controlable AA-guns. Even in sigle play if you like to create such a mission... This feature at first will show the features of our new game-sim engine... as well as it could be direction of parallel development or third party development... At lease I can say that the quality of ground modeling is with the idea in mind to use it for the future interesting features of the gameplay... so smart answer....

5. There will be possible two types of campaing.... One is dynamic with the possibility of managment in a squad and higher. But there will be no feature of High command that could change everything in a war.. Dynamic campaign will be more or less close to history.
The other campaing mode - it is a sequence of single missions, that possible to make very precise from historical point of view. I can't say right now will be such fully developed by us campaign inside the sim with the release, but at least it is possible. as well as there will be some amount of historical single missions right with the release. Anyway we again will offer more than any other developer of flight sims in that item...
Also the campaign systems will be open for thirs party modifications or even for inclusion of own ENGINE of campaign. This will be ture for both sinlge and online gameplay campaigns.

We simply learned all requests of users for some years of Il-2 life... The best that we can do - will be there.

Hope I gave some info for the brain here


89) In SOW, how will muzzle flash be represented? Will it be more realistic? It seems that how it is represented in game now is a bit exagerated (too much like a flame thrower). From period gun footage (or even modern high caliber gun fire footage) it would seem that yes, there is sometimes visible flames, but really they are much more subtle in real life, and in daylight are mostly just puffs of smoke.

Also will the tracer contrail be a bit more realistic (or the graphics more detailed) as well?

muzzle flash... Video and especially film camera can't register on their 24 (and in WWII often 10 to 16) frams per second many of light changes that happens when the gun fires... As well as the specific of sencitivity of film and its dynamic rage that can't registed fire as we can see in real life.
So in Il-2 it was done in the last versions more real than you think...
And I haven't seen yet in a sim more real tracers... If you mean color - they are all by a tracer specifications docs of WWII shells/bullets for each country that we modelled.

At night the fire/flash leight of 20 mm cannon could be even more than 2 meters...
At day it is the same but visible less and even more less on the film (in short words).
At flight it depending of speed... But anyway it is present. The differences of leight we plan to model in flight and on the ground, at day and at night.
The difference at the day/night time was done in Il-2 for the for the first time in the world in game industry.


90) Also will these be free addons or are small payments expected to be involved?

This is a question for some interview..... I will keep this info the the magazines

I only can say you right now... that yes we will have sometime free add-ons with new features, like it was with Il-2.
But other info - till the right time. Everything will be fine

91) A couple suggestions for OLEG for the SOW:

1) In the FMB I would like to see the Player flight NOT be assigned to waypoints. The player flight should be able to do things ON-THE-FLY and not be constrained to flying over specific waypoints precisely in order to advance to the next waypoint. The player should receive orders like an actual briefing and fly according to the briefing to target areas. This could be done with event areas where the player is given a heading, and can receive additional heading information from ADF, or other comms.

2) The AI would fly by waypoints as usual, but it would be nice to have the ability to have alternate waypoints for AI resulting from triggers.

3) It would be a great tool to have Translucent Canopy/cockpit frame rails to offset the fact we have no peripheral vision ability. I'm not talking about NO frame rails. I talking about the regular frame rails are visible, but the player can see through the rails. The floor side panels, instruments, back headrest all would be opague. THe player could not see through those things he could not normally see through, just canopy frame rails.

I say translucent, because even with 6 DOF when you move your head side to side it is not possible to get the same visual effect as a real person gets because of stereoscopic peripheral vision. I would certainly prefer this arrangement over the HUD, which is totally "StarWars".

This would not take way from the fliight experience, because flying the late model P-51, P-47 and several other planes with fulll clear canopies is available now and isn't a CHEAT.

IMO, the big frame rails that are constantly in your way visually don't add to immersion. If you just look at the screen with the big frame rails in front of you it is common to have less than 30% visual. One of my friends that plays other war games said, "That is so stupid looking at the screen and not being able to see what your doing". I agree with him.

So, maybe a switch to Translucent canopy frame rails, a switch to canopy frame rails... this shouldn't be any problem at the programming level to provide. I can make translucent frame rails in photoshop, Paint Shop Pro, etc. for MSFT CFS2 cockpits and it's hardly any work at all.

Thanks for all the work you've done.

1+2) Waypoints are neccessary. Another spech that they should be defined in briffing... and as well as dynamically changed waypoint due to command using radar data for exaple. Triggers will be.

3. No.... transparency of frae details will make visible other things... construction fuselase, engine, etc... Simply we model it by another way than others in arcade games or the games that say that they are simulators of ground battle but the models there ar far from what we say now is most realistic for the current period.
Also on the sceen you see by two eyes. So the comparison with steroscopic view in life and like you mean by one eye isn't right. We simply will have more complex movement of the neck-head-body of the pilot than in Il-2.


92) Oleg has made one statement that didn't turn out true for the Il-2 series (but which will eventually be realised in Bob). So, his statement about always delivering is almost 100% correct. On the other hand Luthier predict two or three features that didn't turn out, and thus, is about half as reliable as Oleg but still more reliable than 99% of us. Furthermore, Luthier never stated that he will always deliver on what he says.

Finally, to my knowledge, he never said he would give us lots of updates & really soon & that they would fulfil all our wildest fantasys & that these updates would include a flyable demo &... All that he said was that he would try to improve communications and keep in touch with the community.

My recommendation: Find something else to do. There are plenty of things out there including people & trees & books &...

Currently Luthier and his team is more busy with BoB (help for us in development of some parts) than with Korea. There are many things that we usually order on the other side... in this case we ordered some of the planes to be finished by them as well as 3D models of ships and some other.

Korea can't moves forward without us. Simply becasue it is based on SoW series engine.

93) Hi Oleg, you may have read here several discussions regarding Ubisoft, i have spoke to Ubisoft in the UK and they have very little knowledge of SOW and are adamant that they are not the publishers, its not that important on the scale of things but it does seem strange that they are proclaiming that they are not and will not be involved. Can you shed any light on this?

Many thanks

Ubisoft is a large company. As I know in Ubi Uk all guys new. And the old that even know me personally were moved in the main office or in another companies. Another one thing - I was in UK Ubisoft office almost 3 years ago... Yes we are working "too" long, but we all would like to get really good thing. And... date of release on different sites of BoB was many time anounced... But I knew it only when it was published there.... Officially BoB was never anounced when it will be released. Usually just hope when... and almost always - TBD.
What I can say really - we are working hard... and BoB will be done doesn't matter of anything in possible future

94) Oleg, in Il-2 Sturmokik 1946, the tracer for the .30 cals on the hurricanes and early spit models is very unrealistic IMHO. The colour is correct as you've mentioned, but if you watch gun-camera videos from the Battle of Britain, the spitfires and hurricanes have smoke on the tracer, like on the Bf-109 models in Il-2.

Any thoughts?

It depending of type of bullets. In Il-2 we don't model all of possible amounts. We select just one of possible for certain type of wepon on that or another aircraft.
So you may see in color films from different theatres even for one type of weapon very different type of tracers, also that was changed some time several times during the war.

95) Oleg, could you give us a little more detail here, if possible?. example - will a radar vector give you the ability to change a waypoint in-flight?

We model all structure of HQ that receive information from the Radar and give then commands to ground AA-artillery, to planes, etc. and if you recieve this information in Air then you should redirect your flight according given info. We try to model it with the precise of that time... so it will be not so precise like in modern time. You even may miss the target by altitude or so... like it was in reality, reading recalls of British pilots.

German radars will work by other way. They used it for another purpose.

96) I have three questions:

1) It was said a long time ago that AI would not be able to look "behind" means that their vision is limited by actual cockpit. Is this still planned?

2) It was said also long time ago that AI will not be able to look through clouds, or less good looking at night. Is this still planned?

I think both those things can revolutionize offline playing. For example, diving in clouds for escape, was, as you know, first thing to do for lonely bomber for example.

and

3) do you already know how much % of a city, like London f.ex will be "generic" buildings, and how much historic (real) buildings? Do you plan to match more or less actual street layout ?

1. Confirmed
2. Confirmed no "radars" across the clouds
3. We will have several very precise copies London building, but other things - most generic... But from above the streets, etc will looks close to the map of 1940 that we have.
To make a full copy of London would take large time... it is impossible... or possible if we will drop the main thing of simulator...

97) I'd like to ask if you are able to provide the ability to save the game in-flight.
It isn't really possible to get the most out of the games with the type of lifestyles most of us lead. Not without sacrificing work and family.

Being able to fly a six-hour bomber sortie for example, in real time but spread out over a couple of sessions would be a great thing for the single player experience. We wouldn't be slaves to the short-hop missions or the time-skip key. If players could share and exchange save points too... Well, you can imagine the possibilities.

I was asking about this feature our developers. It isn't promised, but maybe. Simly now we need to save even more data than in Il-2... and in Il-2 it was way more than in any shooter.

98) I already posted a few, but I of course got another one or two:

Will SoW have an ingame VoiceOverIP-included? It would be really cool to combine these functionalities with the simulation of the radio-system.

Also an ingame-server-browser or at least one, that is distributed with the game would be really helpful. Has this been considered, yet?

Voice telephone? However in Il-2 the user interface for this features wasn't good.
Yes we plan. Because it is really good for the recording of tracks

We plan to make some browser. But probably it will be separate program from which you will be able to star the sim with automatic connection to selected server.
We had such things in the past in our previous (before Il-2) games.

But this program will be not the program that will replace others, that works fine with Il-2.
It will be in additional, if user prefer.

99) Oleg I have seen that models of planes and vehicles have hinges that can be manipulated. Is this also a feature that the player will be allowed to use? Like opening hatches on a tankturret or opening the cockpit of a fighterplane?
And will this feature also be applied to human figures? So the player will be able to position the arms and such of the body?

From the beginning we are making all things openable... I dopn't know how many of these features will go in final reelase... but as with Il-2 this means we will modify the code that to use the BASE input at initial development. With the release we will have AA-guns controlbale by player... this is intersting for Online, but it will also works in a single missions, if you only like to create such.

And as I told... the code will be partially open in terms of modification with the use out of normal fixed parameters and code servers...

In time I think we may see even U-boat controlable The water is transparent in engine.

100) I have some questions regarding the multiplayer:

Will it be possible to change the inflight briefing during the game and will it be possible to paint the flightroute and mark objects on the map?
If so it would be helpfull to add an option to send that customized map to all other squad members during the game.
I also wonder if there is a chance to display own jpg's on the briefing screen (like air recon, notes or tactical maps).
Will the player be able to conquer airports and does that influence the support or reinforcements?

I do have some more questions regarding the mission editor:

Is there any chance of changing the ingame maps, to add markings or notes visible to other players?
I'd like to add a video to the briefing to present the map in the old fashioned "wochenschau" style will that be possible?
And last but not least, is there some sort of trigger so that a sound file (like a radio message) will be played when the player activates the trigger?


I can't say yes to all your questions. Recon maps we would like to make and it is in plan. However I don't know if it will be in release. The format of brief is HTML... so theoretically there is possible to use recon map and send to others across the map. But it will depending of many factors, so I can't tell you 100% yes.

As for the capture airfield.... we plan several online modes in additional to what we had in Il-2... Also can't say you final features


As for changes of map... don't know yet all features that will go in final. You know I never promise when I'm not sure, if you are NSU that I know...

Video in gif or flash player format probably will be possible in a brif. I don't know which type of HTML we will use in final. You know there is going the new version of HTML in future... Proabbly we will stay with the current for a long time. So if to make everything manually for single missions - then you probably may use all features of current HTML version . If automatic - then just limited amount of features... However the engine of campaign (doesn''t matter single or online) will be open for modifications. Or even someone may developm completely own. We will give access to that item of code for modifications that will not damage the fair online gameplay.

You will be able to put on the map trigger with sound message with the defined radius of action.

101) One question....Will the AI still be able to make those impossible maneuvers like they do now? I mean the instant flips, turns, etc... It gets very annoying. I hope they will behave more realistically, and be subject to stalls, blackouts, redouts, etc...

I can't say... Its relative thing of the player-pilot experience. My guys and me can shoot any AI fighter enemy...
Stall, black outs, redouts was a limit for AI even in Il-2. Simply they are robots and calculate it way faster than you.

102) I can't say... Its relative thing of the player-pilot experience. My guys and me can shoot any AI fighter enemy...
Stall, black outs, redouts was a limit for AI even in Il-2. Simply they are robots and calculate it way faster than you.

Probably the right name for AI would be predictable calculation with 100% precise.

In BoB we will have more complex AI behaviour that will be more "humanized".

However before Il-2 there was no one sim with "humanized" aircraft AI like in Il-2...

103) Can you give us a hint about the airborne radar? I remember a previous statement, where you stated this will be possible in SoW, but you were not sure wether this will be in the initial release. Looking at the antennas on the Beaufighter, has the decision been made in the meanwhile?

Airborne radars (onboard) will be only on AI aircraft with the release.
We don't plan to model with the first release night fighers. Too much work for the too small effect in gamplay. The first thing is important that will be economicallyy right in development.

However I do think in future if the BoB will be successful, then we may work over such things as well. As well as third party developers.

104) I can shoot them down too. What I mean is, the AI can execute maneuvers that would send my plane crashing down. The 180 degree instant turns...and I mean instant, is one example.

Never saw myself AI instant turns that I can't repeat myself going by their trajectory.

However it is explained as well above about their precise.

Some time AI with level of Novice also crashes in a stall in dogfight...

105) speaking from a bomber pilot's view, will AI gunners now take into account friendly bombers flying in formation? In IL2 when we do formation flying online, often there is a friendly kill from one of our bombers in the formation.

YES. in BoB such situation shouldn't be possible. As well as fo other AI objects with AI gunners (guns cannons, etc)

106) You mentioned that gunners will differ from one to another by their skill level, but will they also interact more with the pilot, something like 'bandit 5 o'clock, coming in'?

We plan some speech of gunners and thier notices for pilot

107) Also will it be possible to hop into someone elses bomber on DF servers to take copilot seat, or at least a gunner position? No matter if this option will be for coops only, it will help a lot in training pilots how to fly formation and not to mention different formation positions which in IL2 are impossible to fly since we can't use copilot's seat (I know Ju88, He111 and RAF bombers had a single pilot, but this may be a good reference for the future ).

The online protocol of BoB is completely new and different to Il-2, so I would say yes... that would eb absolutley sepearate seats.

108) 1) will there be "terrain masking" in BoB ?
- "terrain masking" means that AI aircraft and enemy radar can not see through mountains and ground obstacles if they are blocking "line of sight" . so for ex if we fly a german aircraft very low over england (say 30 meters altitude) then the english radar will not see us, and similarly when i fly behind a mountain then the radar and AI aircraft on the other side of the mountain will not see me.
(you answered the question for clouds now blocking AI aircraft vision, but you have not answered it for mountains and hills blocking radar and AI visibility)

2) will there be civilian road and rail traffic in BoB ?
- right now in il2 when you see a truck or car on the road it is always military (even the bicycles), same with the trains they are always a military target. if we have some civilian road traffic (few buses and cars maybe doing a programmed "loop" journey) and trains in england (and they existed in ww2 period) then points could be deducted for destroying innocent civilian objects, and that means we need to correctly identify a target before engaging it, not just shoot at anything that moves !

3) will there be AI traffic and activity at the airfields we fly from ?
- microsoft flightsim X already has this, there is refueling trucks, baggage trolleys, other trucks and shunt vehicles driving around the airfield, giving it an "alive" impression
- you mentioned you will have ambulances and fire trucks maybe rushing to a crashed aircraft, but can we have some active vehicles like refueling trucks, ammo trucks, tea truck, jeeps with pilots, base commander in jeep on inspection tour, etc type activity ? (could be switched on/off in options for low end pc not wasting resources)
- can we have similar friendly AI activity in the sky ? in real life there was not just fighter planes and bombers flying in the sky, there was supply planes, transport planes, replacement aircraft etc. can we have some of that activity in the sky and at our airfields ? for ex AI flying in new replacement aircrafts for the squadron, and maybe supply aircraft bringing in parts and supplies, or new pilots etc.. that means other planes will be landing and taking of at our airfield, and flying in the skies near our airfields.
- adding that type of simple activity can make a big difference in bringing the BoB world alive, instead of flying in an empty world like we have in il2 right now.

4) will destroying objects/buildings at an airfield affect the availability of resources at that airfield ?
- for ex if all the fuel dumps at an airfield are bombed it should take X amount of time before fuel is again available at that airfield (new supply needs to be transported to the airfield), during that X time delay there should be no fuel (or ammo for ex) available at that airfield. same principle if all aircraft stationary on that airfield are destroyed by an enemy bombing raid, then we should not be able to magically spawn a brand new aircraft from that location (or hit refly and get a new aircraft) for X amount of time (new aircraft need to be flown in , or damaged aircraft need time to be repaired with spare parts). same if a runway is bombed, the bomb craters should remain taxi/landing/takeoff obstacles for X amount of time till the runway is repaired (you can still use the part of the runway that is not damaged)
- in practice this means that we can gradually shut down an enemy airfield, and force their aircraft to use a more rear located airfield (so it forces the enemy to waste more flying time to reach the frontline)

5) will you correct and improve the "distant object visibility" problem we currently have in il2 ? ie seeing distant LoD models correctly as you would see the the same object (plane/truck/tank) from the same distance with the naked eye in real life
- this is not a problem in il2 when you look at a distant aircraft against the open sky because it is a black (or dark grey) object that is seen against a uniform light blue sky background, but there is a MAJOR problem looking for a small LoD model against the textures of the terrain background, it blends in to much.
- for ex right now in il2 when you fly your aircraft at 1500 meters altitude and you look down to scan the ground for objects, you can not see/locate/track an enemy truck or tank that is standing in an open field or is located on an open road (as you can in real life see it, and historical ww2 pilot reports available), but instead in il2 you need to fly at 500 meters altitude to be able to see it (using the 30 FoV zoom function is not the solution, because it creates tunnel vision and you can only scan a very small narrow part of the ground at a time, and loosing all your peripheral vision it makes you very vulnerable to fly like that). this is because the il2 LoD model blends in to much with the terrain textures (with pc grafix it is a flat 2 dimensional LoD model blending in with the colors of the flat 2 dimensional terrain textures, but in real life it is a 3 dimensional solid object that stands out much more)
- will you compensate for this pc grafix problem in BoB and make distant LoD models stand out more so they are correctly visible ? you mentioned we will have more LoD models in BoB, instead of the 3 currently used in il2, but i am asking about making the LoD model stand out more so it is correctly visible and we can see those objects like tank/truck/planes from the exact same distance as we can see them in real life !

1. Yes. Will be another technology, but means the same. The polar pattern of radars we try to model as close to real things as it possible. Of course with some approximations, but anyway close.

2. It is possible. Probably we will minimize it in release, becasue of hit to resources, but in general Buses already now can travel by their own trajectory in a city and make stops as well cars will try to find place for parking in a end "waypoint". It is working already. Just would repeat the amount of such action probably we will need to minimize due to resource eater feature. But for Editor we will offere to use it for enduser to modify scenery, etc...

3. See above. Yes we plan some life on airfields. But the main goal of course still will be the air battles

4. Yes. Also we are currently working over "real" 3D craters of bomb hits on the ground.. that will destroy the usability of airfields for some time (real time for repair of runway or the time that defined in tunings of mission or on server)

5. The resolution of detials and LODs is way higher than in lL-2. How far we we will see the type of the object... I can't say right now. All will depends of the all final resource-eaters....
In Il-2 once we did halfransparent dot for the groun objects that to make some ability to see it from longer distance... howver users dislike this system and preffered to go back as it was.
It isn't definitiopn of the LOD only. It is definition of the screen resolution, and power of a system on which we will run BoB in fuuture in a middle settings.
Also due to online gamplay we will need to make it absolutely identical to medium system for the fair gameplay. Its a rule... Or the player with more power PC and greate resolution of the monitor you would be named as a cheater.... We already have great experience in that and many items of gameplay when we need to go for some middle level of details on middle to high power game machines...

109) Can players join coops after mission start?

Can if there is free place. One of selected in a special menu AI will be replaced by new player.

110) As you say ground AA guns will be playable, Will AA guns on naval/merchant ships be playable as well?

Sure with the release will be only ground AA-guns of some more or less similar by power types for both sides for the fair gameplay online. Later - we will see. The code will aloow much more than Il-2 code. And even more

111) 1. You've mentioned earlier that SOW series will be open for 3rd party add on makers and that they can implement a more detailed simulation of an aircrafts operating procedures than the default planes will feature. (realistic start up procedures etc.)
Can you say us what level of detail will be possible, what subsystems can actually be simulated?

2. Especially will it be possible to switch between different fuel tanks, which was very important in some aircraft like the P-51?

3. I've read in an old interview that AI crew members in BOB can panic and just fire around wildly. Is such an feature also planned for AI flak gunners? Something like crewmen abandoning their guns when under fire, so that you can use historic tactics to suppress the enemy AAA with strafing runs.

4. Will it be possible for the user to edit the available loadouts for each plane in any way or will there be a fixed predefined set like in Il-2?


1. Can't say at the moment. I only can say that in each cokpit we model we make all switches operable in 3D models. But not operable in the intial code. As I told it is for "masochists"

2. To switch different fuel tanks should be possible in intial release.

3. Not everything. Partially panic, but close to very historic types of attach - yes.

4. Probably. It will depending of the final GUI complexity. I can say that we now can change the load of the bullet/shell belts, but it will be anyway in a way of some amount of standard sets. And special effiency of each shell/bullet type will play more greater role than in Il-2.

112) 1 Damage of coolant lines; coolant leaks: will it be modeled? (yes/no, however detailed answer is welcome too).
2 Reversal of controls; wing twist;

1. Yes. More detailed when will be ready.

2. If you mean the problem on ailerons of Spitfire before and including initial series of MK V due to rodation of the wing relatively aileron - Yes we plan it. Wing twist - visually separate of each console - not.

113) 1. Will be possible to set in the planes random or pre-defined malfunctions?? For example, when in an online war the aicrafts get worn and as a result of this, the failure percent increases.

2. How complex is going to be the procedure of starting the engines? (you said earlier that it might be more complex)

3. Will it have more realistic effects on starvation of engine, and mixture control??
How will the engine handle the flaps? Will it follow the historical procedures of every model or will it have 2 or 3 levels of predefined angle flaps?

4. How will the monitor resolution and "points of aircraft" (contacts at distance) work?? Today lot of people don´t use high resolution because they "don't see the contacts"...

5. Can we get out of the planes and walk? (At least, in the start of the mission)


6. Will be more data written in eventlog.lst?? It´s very useful to create dynamic campaings.

1. It will be defined by a code. Player can't define it except the feature to swich it off in difficulty settings (as well as on a server).

2. Maybe a bit more complex, but maybe anyway by one button. It is still diputable in our team. But sure we wiill not copy rweal procedures for each aircraft. Fist becasue it is tioo much time eater in development. Second, becasue if to do, then to do it really correct, but not like others WWII sims developer declare that they have it realistic. Enough to compare with real manual the item "preparing for fligth(take off, or so)"...
The main thing is that most active people will play online our sim and opnly periodically - single play. In online gameplay the procedure for real starting engine will limit very much gameplay, so we MUST go there fro compromises with reality. The only real starting procedure will reduce interest for the gameplay very much... as well as some other real features (like real ACTUAL time of refueling and reloading) - then you will get German or Russian plane ready more quiker than British or US.... This will damage the online gameplay be sure...

3. Yes. A bit. Becasue we model more precise fuel consumption due to different input, than in Il-2.

4. This I already answered above in other answers.

5. No. But in a code it is possible alreay now. see my other answers.

6. We have completely new online protocol. More for sure.

114) May we NOT include these two things in SOW BOB

1. Elevator Trim on a slider facility or any quick trim change. Also flaps on a slider if not historically correct eg Spit ( by the way I mostly fly the spit)

2. Sonic radar. when plane you are attacking can hear you from a long way away and evade.

These two game "exploits" harm online play in my opinion

I know you are busy , but I think we are all very pleased you are able to spend some time here, thank you.

1. Initially in Il-2 it was possible, but then a lot players that haven't such sliders on their home controller begun to sign a song that they are cheaters... That to make fair gameplay we did protection in a code for this feature that to make for all the speed of changes equal.

2. In Il-2 the sound engine was designed for HiEnd sound cards. It was so different sounding on Hi End and on regular cards.... On simple motherboard cards of some producers the panning was so simple, that we was unable to control it or regulate the distance... and some people begun to use it... In BoB we will have completely new sound engine that will not depending of type of sound card. We simply did own panning code, etc...

Also how to limit the ability of player to make louder his speakers... still don't know This will be the only one limit I know in a new sim...

115) is it possible to visually show the angle of the propeller? I refer to the possibility of altering the propeller pitch and see it in real time like some MsFS aircrafts.

Yes it is. To see it well will be possible when the propeller isn't rotating. I rotation to see it hard, but possible, because we have fair "blur" disk of the propeller when rotating.

116) I'd like to ask if SoW will feature bailing out in first-person perspective?

The current style of Il-2 and previous sims is for the "camera" to jump to an external perspective - right at the moment of greatest immersion. It tends to destroy the atmosphere more than a bit. As I'm planning on getting shot down a lot, it's something very important to me!


technically in engine it is possible, but I don't think we will have work time for such "small" features before we will release the sim.

117) 1) Will features like 'F6' be server controlable now? Meaning that we can have servers with externals on but no external padlock?

2) Will gunners now feel the effect of G-forces? IMHO, in IL2 the most unrealistic thing related to how gunners work is their resistance to G-forces. And this goes specificaly for tail gunners which can accuratly aim at you even if their plane is pulling extreme G's.

3) How will gun positions and bomber stations work in SoW? If the bombardier is on the bomb run - will he also be able to man the nose gun or will nose gun remain silent if you attack a bomber who is close to releasing his bombs? Another example are waist gunners - in He-111 to my knowledge only one person operated both waist gunners. If bomber is being attacked from 3 and 9 o'clock will only one gun fire?

4) Will gunners scan the horizon for enemy planes or will guns and turrets be in their default position at all times when no enemies are nearby?

Edit:

I thought of one more.

5) Will control surface movements be visible on other planes than just player's in online DF servers and tracks?

Edit 2:

Just thought of three more questions about ship modeling:

6) How will ships behave when heavily damaged / sinking? Will it be different from IL2 when they sink in a matter of seconds after being destroyed or will they sink by flooding or heavy damage (especialy if in stormy weather)? What about small (example: landing crafts or RAF rescue speedboats...) - will strafing be accompanied by an explosion to tell us that they are destroyed or will it be possible to model them like I asked above (just strafe them and they sink slowly, so we don't allways get that explosion which tells us that they are destroyed)?

7) In relation to the above questions, will ships have weak points - for example if hit in ammo magazine to cause fatal damage and if hit in other not vital areas to make them withstand more damage/hits?

9) Any chance for lifeboats / survivors in the sea after large ships sink? (I know it's maybe a long shot but...)

1. Will ask my guys to do not forget it
2. Will
3. question is done too early (as many others from other guys)
4. These turrerts that has two positions for fire and the speedy flight will work as it should. It is done with actual time animations.
5. will but on close distances.
6. Way more complex than in Il-2. As for the rescue.. we plan special aircraft for that in missions. Boats - maybe, maybe not. To wait boat will be too hard so great time... Not too interesting for the gameplay.
7. Weak points will be. But not the ammo belts of MGs of ships
9. I think no. Becasue at first we are doing flight sim, then we are thinking what is most important to develope for ther other things that have their own sequence of importance.

118) Oleg. I was wondering if there could be anti submarine missions?

May be... in time. In principle possible.

119) Will it be possible to overlay scans of real maps so that these can be used as a guide when creating the terrain model, laying out roads, rail, towns, woods, waterways etc?

Will it be possible to import satellite height data (SRTM Data) to create the initial terrain model?

Will it be possible to automatically fill ground textures with buildings and objects, based on standard templates? If so can the standard templates be edited by the map maker?

Will there be any fixed limits on the size of map which can be created?

Will it be possible to copy and paste groups of objects in a map?

Will it be possible to copy and paste groups of objects from one map to another map.

Automatic aligning and spacing of objects?

Will it be possible for rivers/bridges to be above sea level. On IL-2 maps the water surfaces and bridges are all at zero level.

Will it be possible to create more complex rail systems including rail sidings, rail junctions, embankments, cuttings, more realistic looking bridges (without approach ramps), tunnels, rail over road bridges, road over rail bridges?

Will it be possible to make steps in a river, to create waterfalls, river weirs, lock systems, enclosed harbours etc.

Will the sea be tidal with more land exposed at low tide?

Will you be able to crop out part of a large map to easily create a small custom map for online use.

Will you be able to extend the boundaries of an existing map to cover a larger geographical area?

You would like to know to much and too early.
Right now I would say that most of requested by you features are used for internal tools.
For the end user some of them will be removed due to many commercial reasons.

100% answer can be done for the size of map. For the end users it will be limited in size. Because the great size map will will keep only for us, as a developrs of the next after BoB new sim or/nad map + objects addons on a payware basis.
So in general enduser will be able to make own maps say for online gameplay in proportions like it is done for Il-2.

120) Hi Oleg, I have a question for you, why the planes in Il2-sturmovik not represent the real velocity???? for example: one FW-190d9, in the war have a max velocity of 730 km/h at 11.000 meters, in the game this is not true, and the Ta 152c have to low performance on all altitudes, why???
Sorry for mi english, but i speak spanish, and my vocabulary suck. Salute

Sure that real D9 wasn't able to reach 730 km/h
Ta-152c - I hope you don't read indicator speed that to get image of real speed with which aircraft is flying. Compare indicator speed in cockpit and in the mode without cockpit. Without cockpit the speed is real. In cockpit - indicated. Please read in internet or books what is real speed(TAS) and indicated(IAS)

121) the editor map is good for create any situation of war.
but the texture for map not satellite photo but synt immage.
and another difficult problem for the map is creation of mesh terrain the mountain and the valley not real to reality.
Example i want create the island Sicily how many create the vulcan ETNA?
How do I create the equal reliefs of the ground to those of the reality?
i think this is EDITOR MAP for game tipe the SIM CITY or another GAME.
but this is WW2 simulator this is a serius game.
for the serius game takes the serius map editor.
i loock Oleg Maddox like create synt file.
Example in il-2 sturmovik the sound not real but synthetic.
this map editor is synthetic immage.

If you only want you can create the map with sattelite precise and with the limits that gives you the grid of tools.
But you can't load directly the dot matrix (raster) image into the tools. You will need to work with it to the standards of tools... to create layers of altitudes, etc...

Nothing comon here with the SIM CITY

Another way if you want to create new quick map that is siutable for the new scenery of online gameplay... then our tools will give you ability to make it very fast and easy and looking like real surface with only features that we offer in standard set... However even in this case you can make own textures and to add it in tools that to work with them and use in new map.

122) For most people even a generic panel is a huge investment, not to mention a complete cockpit mock up where every switch and lever sits on the right place.

And why should a clickable VC prevent anybody from mapping any function he desires to the keyboard or other externals? You can still play any flightsim just with the keyboard alone despite probably all simmers have at least a joystick.

Joystick is a _must be_ device for the flight sim. In all other cases with the other devices the FM must be simplified and it will be in BoB for the possibility to play with gamepad for example. Except special flight sim devices like bomber control column wheels, etc... But it is another story...

Notice: However if you are playing with gamepade or other similar device and then connect the online server where all other plays with the joystics (settings on the server) then you automatically will get the switch to normal FM... and possibly will be not able to play with others on the same level of aircraft control, like with at least Joystick.

my personal opinion as well as all pilots that I know and was asking specially for this item, all tell that clickable cockpit by the mouse is Ok for the the civil aircraft (say such funtctions like levers, wheels, etc), but anyway it isn't even comparable to the real life precise of hand movement... Say, pedals also clickable?
Mapping on the device or even keyboard is more close to real life than to make all things clickbale/moveable by the mouse. Especially in military aircraft....
Some reealtive sample: I would be glad to see how some will be control aircraft by the joyistick and then by the mouse simultaniosly clicking on the fire button on the control column in 3D cockpit. This sample I give only as realtive. But it is easy to understand in comparison...

[Feuerfalke]

Very nice!

I hope your collection of answers will replace the old thread, so people don't ask for the things already answered over and over again.

[Nike-it]

Ok, guys, really good idea, so this is new thread for Q & A. The old one is closed from this moment. Forgottenfighter thanks for the summarizing info.

[virre89]

Will oil from let's say an fuel leak pour onto the windsheild dynamiclly or like a splash texture like in the previous game. Just curious :)

[Forgottenfighter]

From this point onwards could everyone please try articulate their posts such that they actually contain a question for Oleg with regard to SOW BOB. The idea of this thread was not to hide the unanswered questions in the previous Oleg Maddox's Room, nor to simply rename it. If there is any chance that Oleg will answer our questions, we need a fresh thread to remove the same posts that some people are now bringing back here. Keep it clean, more questions less rambling about Oleg abandoning us. Thank you.

[SlipBall]

Hi Oleg, During the war gunner's were told to use short burst of their guns to avoid extream heat damage, and even melting. Will this possible type damage to the guns, be included in damage moddel of SOW?

[Flyby]

Will SoW_BoB make more efficient use of two cores (75% usage for both cores? 80%?) or wil it show better efficiency with a quad-core cpu? I wonder if it's better to have a sim where you can turn on all the goodies, and have (say...) 50% per core usage on a dual core? That might imply some headroom left by the sim. So I discount that, knowing the source of the sim. Is it predictable that Sow with all the goodies turned on will overpower a quad core running at 3.6ghz, and 90% efficiency? If so, good thing it's scalable!! :D
No chance this sim will be more GPU intensive than CPU intensive. Right?
Flyby out

[SlipBall]

Oleg(quote)
We are developing the simulation of ground AAA support in all areas, including radars, High Command, etc. It will work as a system: damage of one will have result in other.(quote)



Will this type damage logic apply to airfields that have had their fuel levels/ammo levels lessened do to an attack. Will it under these circumstances prevent the choice of a full load of fuel prior to take off. Possibly then have to go land at another airfield to re-fuel or even just to get ammo?...And then how to know other airfield have supplies...have to call to them by their location name, using the Radio?...and finally would it be possible to use a program such as teamspeak to communicate with the AI controll tower (or possibly a human because of ground position choice's, not that anyone would choose to be in a tower:grin:), instead of using text?

[SlipBall]

What I was thinking was a type of speech recognition software for some simple phrases in game, requiring the use of a mic...its everywhere now a days:-P

[Feathered_IV]

What I was thinking was a type of speech recognition software for some simple phrases in game, requiring the use of a mic...its everywhere now a days:-P

I was daydreaming about that a while back in this thread: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=2813&highlight=superficial

Working Radar Control in Online Play:


You log on to an SoW server and join the game. A mission is already in progress. On the briefing map, you can see that there are plots all over the board.

You select RAF and choose a Spitfire flying out of Hornchurch. The server auto-generates you the callsign Baker, Blue Three.

Entering the game, you taxi out of your revetment and scramble immediately. Climbing hard, en-route for Dover you ask control for an intercept vector. You key in the commands for this (promising yourself you will get around to sorting out the voice activation system one day soon. Everybody says it's amazing).

You key in: Tab> 1> 3> 2. "Hello Control> This is Baker Blue three> Requesting vector."
Using voice samples similar to those in the old Il-2, the AI controller replies, "Hello Baker Blue three. Steer 160. Bandits inbound at angels zero. Range 40 miles. Over" The AI controller has appointed you a "channel" based on your location on the map. Not everybody hears the same control messages, thus avoiding clutter. A pair of Hurricanes nearby have heard this however, and change course to intercept too.

"Hello Baker Blue Three. This is control. Are you recieving me? Over."

Ah whoops! Unlike the Il-2 series, this controller actually requires a response to communications. If you do not respond to calls he will keep calling you, before finally giving you up as lost.
You key in: Tab> 1> 3> 6. "This is Baker Blue Three. Received and understood."

Minutes later, speeding across the fields of Kent, you key in a request for an update from control.
"Hello Baker Blue three. Steer 160. Contact faint. Bandits at angels zero. Range 20 miles. Over"
They are holding course then. Twenty miles would put them just north of New Romney...

Suddenly the AI control breaks in:
"Hello Baker Blue three. Bandits now heading two zero. Steer oh seven oh. Buster!"

You acknowledge and open the throttle wide, swinging onto the new heading. Your heart skips a beat as two Hurricanes flash across your nose.

"Hello Baker Blue three. This is control. You are right on top of them."
You dip your wing. Can't see a bloody thing. No, wait...there they are! Three fast moving shapes. Darting across the town of Ashford. Rooftop height. Me110's from Erpro-210, making a run for Biggin Hill. You key in the last call - a tallyho to Control. Saftey catches off. Gunsight on. As you half roll into the dive, the gunner of the rearmost 110 is already firing......

[robtek]

@feathered IV

quite nicely written but the 110´s should have been hidden from the radar by the ground reflections unless they were above, say... angels 3, or not?
Also detection should be impossible by radar once they passed the coast, one would have to rely on aircraft spotters.
And finally if you have managed to loose the 2 hurris in your hot pursuit of the 110´s those 3 experienced fighter pilots are quite a match for a (assumption) snotty nosed air force reserve pilot officer just 9 months out of college. :-)

[SlipBall]

feathered IV
Your vision and presentation through exciting word decription is very enjoyable to read, I'm surprised that I missed the other thread. You paint a very possitive picture of a gaming experience that would transform time, and put us all in the middle of the great war, get tired of the dog fight thing, looking for more I quess. I can only hope that your ideas have been considered, and that SOW will incorperate such exciting game play. I wish that the developer would discuss such possibilities here, instead of the silence that we have

[ALien_12]

Will we be able to choose aircraft in Single Player like in Il-2 Coop missions?

[Abbeville-Boy]

oleg in bob can we set cross wind for runway:confused:will it change by itself as the weather front moves:confused: thank for reply

[SlipBall]

Oleg, A pilot should always try to take-off and land into the wind. In SOW with the ever changing weather, how will the pilot on approuch to a field, know the current wind conditions for landing at that airfield? Will it be that he must read the wind sock, or will the information come from the tower via the radio?

[KG26_Alpha]

Oleg:

Will SOW

1. Have better (larger) ground object ratio to aircraft size.

2. Have the old collision modelling (able to chew rudders off with propeller) . This was removed because of the dogfight servers complaining of ramming IIRC.

3. Have full radio & navigation equipment working especially the bombers eg: Fug 25 IFF

4. The points system removed and kills, shared kills, probables, bombed factories airfield hangars,shipping and all ground targets shown as graphic icons.

5. Better control over AI bomber flights, ability to get flight as flight leader to drop without having to lock ground targets, at the moment AI follow you like a love sick puppie then try to kill you when you land.

Cheers

[*Buzzsaw*]

Salute

In the past, Oleg was interviewed, during which interview, he mentioned he would be releasing the recommended requirements for SOW BoB in May of 2009.

Many of us have been waiting to upgrade our computer systems until we hear from Oleg what the requirements are. We want to get a system which can run the game at the levels which deliver all the eye candy we have come to expect from Oleg's games.

Can you at this point tell us what the recommended requirements are? Or when these will be published?

Thanks very much for your patience and thanks to Oleg for all his hard work, we know that SOW BoB will be an amazing game. :)

[Aullido]

Hi,

I have some questions/sugestions about bombers:

1. Some of those bombers have a navigator in its crew. It would be nice if we can ask him where the hell we are.

2. Will the speed rotation of the turrets be modeled?

[*Buzzsaw*]

Salute

Here's another graphics related question.

From what I understand, Oleg has already said that the game will be optimized for multi core CPU's, but my question would be, would it also be optimized for multi core Graphics CPU's?

Ie. would a dual core Graphics card such as an ATI 4870 X 2 1024mb be a better choice than a faster, but single core NVidia GTX 285?

Thanks again

[nearmiss]

Some good points made about the content of this thread.

I just spent over an hour removing 12 of 15 pages of postings that were nonsense from this thread.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=71885&postcount=6

First the postings will go, then if posters persist to post the stuff... then the posters.

This purpose of this thread was about questions and issues in one place for Oleg to read, and possibly discuss.

I'm cleaning the thread by deleting postings. Don't be alarmed if you invaluable insights are gone.

Read the first page of this thread it has a purpose and is sticky for that reason.

No more gripes and whines, if you expect answers to viable questions to Oleg then ask.

Carefully prepare your questions, he doesn't have time to read through the kind of mash we've just experienced.

[SlipBall]

Hi Oleg, I think that it would be a good idea, if a player could check his gunstat's in off-line play mode. Please consider this possibility:)

[zapatista]

Hi oleg,

1) with the dynamic campaign engine will there be constant non-combat "background" AI activity in england that includes for ex:
- transport aircraft taking of from some airfields and heading to other airfields to deliver cargo, aircraft spare parts, munitions, fuel (whatever was historically accurate).
- groups of unarmed fighter aircraft being flown by non-combat pilots from the factories (located in the rear) to the various airfields. once landed they become "available" for selection at that airfield for ex. this is historically correct activity, and special groups of pilots constantly flew these new replacement aircraft to various squadron airfields
- small passenger aircraft flying in new pilots, recovered pilots who have parachuted during combat, or even VIP's flying in their own aircraft or as passengers (as was historically the case)
- some squadrons would get relocated from airfield A to B, so that mission might simply be relocating the aircraft to another airfield, rather then fighting (but you could encounter anything possible in flight of course)
- supply truck convoys (and trains) bringing in fuel, munitions etc

in some scenarios that type of activity was very important (stalingrad for german resupply, gibraltar for the British etc), but even when you read historical accounts of BoB and ww2, most larger airfields had a constant buzz of activity of aircraft flying in and out, and not all of those were pure combat missions, having some of that same activity would bring the sim "alive" instead of flying in dead space.

even as a friendly pilot flying over england, you would need to clearly identify the aircraft you have spotted, rather then just shoot at anything that doesnt look like a spitfire or hurricane. similarly on the ground some trains and trucks could be civilian, others might be military transports (points deducted for shooting civilians, points gained for destroying military transport). again we as pilots would need to IDENTIFY what we see before we shoot at it. some il2 pilots would also enjoy flying those supply missions, where for ex you have to fly cargo from A to B, and might have to be on the constant lookout for enemy fighters (or friendly fighters who mistake you for an enemy)

2) if a small amount of AI activity and missions is included like that in BoB, will that part of the game engine be open to 3e party developers so we can make this more complex in detail ?

3) will we be able to stop fuel and munitions (and spare parts for repairs) being available for aircraft at an enemy airfield by bombing/destroying their fuel dumps and hangers at that airfield ? so that if those are destroyed, it would take X amount of time again before aircraft that landed there can be refueled again ?
- this has the benefit of being able to "shut down" an enemy airfield, and force them to use another airfield. in the historical BoB that is exactly what the germans initially did, but then they made the error of attacking london and big residential cities instead, allowing the airfields to recover and be repaired. this is a tactic we should be able to use in a simulator as well i hope.

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Zapatista, I guess the second question has already been answered previously.

But I have a question about a subject many complained on IL-2 series (and led to development of many softwares and MODs to correct this): aircraft markings.

I believe they will be the 1940 standard for German planes (a little question about it: will the swastikas be avaible? They make it so more historical correct and immersive) and A1 markings for British planes, right?. But will there be default skins with the markings (such as in some American and Japanese planes, and in Hawker Tempest in IL-2) and only lettering show (and this lettering, will it be similar to the old one, that looks more like it was glued than painted, or like in fully marked skins we can find around or even like MAT Manager (the markings and lettering are a little bit transparent so they look more natural in game)? And will we be avaible to select some special markings (this specially concerning about German planes. Some planes were painted with different markings instead of numbers). Will we be avaible to select different variations of this kind of markings on Storm of War? I know it might be too early for this question because you've said on the first page that sounds haven't been set yet, but it might be outdated, so: different accents for squadrons formed by foreign pilots (Polish, Czech, French and etc.)? And what about some popular phrases said over radio (such as "Achtung Spitfeuer!"), will they be present in the speech pack?

[Tree_UK]

Hi Oleg do you know if the game will be available has a download?

[flyingbullseye]

Hi Oleg, a graphics question.

In IL2 we have two options, either openGL or DX. In the past nvidia cards did better with openGL and if used the current ATI cards do better with DX 10.1. Will you offer the two options of openGL and DX but use DX 10.1 for the ATI users giving the community the best of both worlds?

Flyingbullseye

[zapatista]

Lucas,

oleg already answered that no gore and no swastikas etc.. will be in BoB, to maintain PG ratings and comply with certain countries legal systems (no swastikas allowed in germany for ex)

[KG26_Alpha]

Hi Oleg, a graphics question.

In IL2 we have two options, either openGL or DX. In the past nvidia cards did better with openGL and if used the current ATI cards do better with DX 10.1. Will you offer the two options of openGL and DX but use DX 10.1 for the ATI users giving the community the best of both worlds?

Flyingbullseye


From Oleg on page 1 of this thread

text

Quote:

9) My question is: on what operatiing system SOW-BOB will run?
Will it be based on OpenGl as Il2 was or DirectX?
Will it be DirectX9 or 10? Or both?

Oleg:
OpenGl - still main.


************************************************** *************************************


Oleg:

Regarding being able to join a COOP mission in progress, as you have stated if the option is selected by the host this allows pilots to join a Coop in progress replacing an AI slot, will this also allow pilots to select an aircraft within the Coop mission if they have been shot down and take an AI seat without leaving the Coop and having to rejoin ?

Cheers :)

[JG52Uther]

Hi Oleg,
Can we have an option for a server setting to turn OFF points in dogfights?

[zapatista]

Oleg:

Regarding being able to join a COOP mission in progress, as you have stated if the option is selected by the host this allows pilots to join a Coop in progress replacing an AI slot, will this also allow pilots to select an aircraft within the Coop mission if they have been shot down and take an AI seat without leaving the Coop and having to rejoin ?

Cheers :)

oleg already previously mentioned that when flying an aircraft in BoB (or you get killed) you will be able to switch to another AI aircraft in flight while the game is still running (and when in an aircraft you can switch to any crewman position in the same aircraft to)

presumably this will have an on/off setting in the options, so some servers can use "dead is dead"

[Buster_Dee]

Oleg, will AI flying in bomber formations be dynamic, able to close ranks well when one of their number is shot down?

For the later mods of SoW, that would be especially noticeable in the complex USAAF formations.

[nearmiss]

Gripes, whines, complaints, rants, release date questions, and other disgruntled postings will be edited or deleted from this specific thread.

This thread, Oleg Maddox #2 is dedicated for users with sensible questions to Oleg about the upcoming BOB SOW application.

The first two pages of this thread have a large composite of questions and answers by Oleg to users.

You might check there before you make a new posting to assure your question has not already been answered.

The rest of the forums is open as always and standard forum rules apply.

Thanks

[Feuerfalke]

Will SoW make reflective skins and sun-reflections possible?

Many reports state that canopy and late in war the polished metal of the US-fighters sometimes reflected the sun, making them visibile over large distances.

Will this effect be available in SoW and would you see a difference between a polished P-51 and a dull olive painted in terms of reflections?

[dgeorge04]

Hi Oleg,

Will it have "post processing filtering"?

Thank you

[Tree_UK]

Hi Oleg, could you tell us at the current level your at with this development whether the game engine runs significantly better with Nvidia cards running in SLI mode, we have seen that even most recent game releases only show a marginal FPS increase when running dual/triple/quad setups. Or are you not at that stage yet.

[Feuerfalke]

My question:
UBIsoft announced that on their press-conference on June 1st a number of previously secret projects will be officially shown to the public. (www.ubi.com (http://www.ubi.com) -> news)

Rumors also stated, that there will be some real blockbusters, long awaited sequels of previously released games, that will be presented by very special people for the community.

Are you going to this years E3, Oleg? :grin:

[zapatista]

Hi Oleg.

about your new dynamic campaign engine ....the historical battle of Brittan ran from roughly the 10th June 1940 to the 15 September 1940, .......

a) does this mean we can start a server running the dynamic campaign and over 3 months of permanent uptime it will constantly generate missions over those 3 months whenever we join it ? (there is historical data available which is that accurate, some books i have on that era lists day per day what exact german/english missions were flown)
note: the initial campaign engine could just do a few of those main mission for each week (say about 30 missions in total for the 4 month period for ex)

b) when we join a dynamic campaign server, can we choose and select what mission to fly (like in falcon4 campaign servers for ex), so we could select for ex
- bomber escort mission in a fighter, or chose the bomber aircraft
- fighter patrol
- cargo plane to fly in supplies to an airfield etc..

c) if the initial campaign engine wont be as detailed, is it possible to open up this part of the game to 3e party developers so the il2 community can keep working on it and add that level of detail ?

[Icewolf]

will an ashtray be modeled in the 109 cockpit like the one Galland had installed in his 109 ?

[Bobb4]

My question:
UBIsoft announced that on their press-conference on June 1st a number of previously secret projects will be officially shown to the public. (www.ubi.com (http://www.ubi.com) -> news)

Rumors also stated, that there will be some real blockbusters, long awaited sequels of previously released games, that will be presented by very special people for the community.

Are you going to this years E3, Oleg? :grin:
Please say yes
Will SOW ship with dedicated server side software and once released how long do you expect turn-around to be on expansions.
Battle of France, Balklands and Eastern front.

And on my WW2 online / ARMA2 crusaded. Would it be feasable to create such a game?
Would the engine handle a FPS type perspective for ground units?

[He111]

As long as SOW allows me to create WOT-IF-SCENARIOS, i'll be happy.

WI - Some He111 were armed with 20mm cannons (for 1/2 the bomb load - weight issues) to protect bomber formations

WI - Whirlwinds had been available for BOB (ok, I know Whirly-winds won't be available)

WI - The big wing theory had been used earlier.

WI - Emils had long range fuel tanks.

WI - heinkel fighters were selected for Laftwaffe and not Bf 109.


I'm a long term fan, we're still out there! .. just waiting.

[zakkandrachoff]

about luftwaffe drop fuel, check this site

http://warandgame.wordpress.com/2008/08/03/the-luftwaffe-and-drop-fuel-tanks-1939-40/

i hope oleg see this

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Well, I've got another one here:

In Storm Of War, will we be able to destroy railways? It would make the game much more historically correct. Attacks with bombs or rockets could explode the trails, and slow down enemy train movement in that sector, and it would be a beutiful thing to explode a railway and see a derrailment of a totally loaded fuel train. :evil:

[Abbeville-Boy]

bombed runway damage that last a bit as well for emersion :evil:

[Icewolf]

Hello Oleg
I would like to see some way to speed up people hitting the fly button in online games.
maybe a timer that the host could activate?
something ,anything to make people hit that fly button after an allotted time has past

[Codex]

Well, I've got another one here:

In Storm Of War, will we be able to destroy railways? It would make the game much more historically correct. Attacks with bombs or rockets could explode the trails, and slow down enemy train movement in that sector, and it would be a beutiful thing to explode a railway and see a derrailment of a totally loaded fuel train. :evil:

Oleg said this will be modelled. Do a search in Google Videos for an interview by Mysticpuma with Oleg, couple of years old now but it should still be around.

[wheelsup_cavu]

I think this is the video you were talking about Codex.
Oleg_and_Ilya_by_Mysticpuma_talk_about_BoB_and_IL2 _at_Sim_show.avi (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1866144906641648934&ei=RT0TSqfEFpe2qAOS8qhx&q=Mysticpuma+with+Oleg)


Wheelsup

[Skoshi Tiger]

I can't remember if this has been asked before but it is a major gripe for me due to the monotonous regularity of its occurrence ...

When a pilot ejects in SOW, will thier body still pass through the aircraft structure? Or will the body bounce off or get entangled on the airframe?

After successfully bailing out will the parachute become entangled when landing in trees?

Also after a crash landing where the plane flips over (a thing I do quite regularly) will we still get the blue image where the line of sight goes beneath the ground poly's?

Cheers?

[Bobb4]

Loved the Simhq interview...
Any chance we can see the game engine in action, short video, even still images?
Second question, you mention 17 planes. Are these historic planes or exotics not linked to the Battle of Britain?

[idonno]

"You may see again some very interesting details.
Modeling of AAA in our new simulator means following (for example):
Say, if the electricity generator of search light will be destroyed, then the search light wouldn’t work… then the effectiveness of anti aircraft guns also wouldn't be good.
We are developing the simulation of ground AAA support in all areas, including radars, High Command, etc. It will work as a system: damage of one will have result in other.
Also would remind that British and German radar systems will have different purpose as it was in reality."

Oleg Maddox


Any chance there will be a delay between when an aircraft comes into view of the AAA and when the AAA starts firing?

It has always been a major shortcoming of IL2 that surprise attacks are impossible, as if the gunners lived at their guns 24/7. Surprise attacks were not uncommon in real life.

I.D.

[C6_Krasno]

It has always been a major shortcoming of IL2 that surprise attacks are impossible, as if the gunners lived at their guns 24/7. Surprise attacks were not uncommon in real life.
Please excuse me for OT and delete this post if you want, but you can "fake" these surprise attacks by setting the detection range of the AAA to a quite low level. This way, the AAA won't see you until you cross this range, and then it will fire at you as long as you remain in its fire range.

[idonno]

... you can "fake" these surprise attacks by setting the detection range of the AAA to a quite low level...

Yes, but it's not quite the same. If the range is set too short, you might not set off a lot of the guns, even with repeated passes. If the range is set long enough to activate all of the guns, you will have them all open up on you on the first pass, which defeats the purpose.

In a well executed attack, it was sometimes possible to make the first pass before some (or even many) of the guns could be maned at all. Subsequent attacks, however, could be on the verge of suicidal.



I.D.

[flyingbullseye]

Oleg, since you have in your possession ROF, how are the PC requirements in that sim compared to SOW? Higher, same?

Flyingbullseye

[Lancelot]

Well, some questions/requests from my part:

1) Will we have ships with some AI. I mean, performing evasive maneuvers to make more dificult hiting them with bombs and/or torpedoes.

2) Will we have small, medium and large fleets as a whole? I mean transport convoys with destroyers moving around, or strike forces that move in formation, and so on. Instead that to have to put on the mission builder one ship at the time. Or creat fleets by our self and place the on the map like a single object.

3) Will you keep or improve the possibility to modify the "rate of fire" of flak from ships like we have on IL-2? Its a very good thing and i hope we will have it also on SoW.

4) Will be improved the damage that anti-tanks guns do. One problem i have witi IL-2, is that with some tanks could be hit countless times by anti-tank guns and still live like nothing happened, and the anti-tanks guns being destroyed one at the time, becoming completely useles. This forced me to use tanks instead of the anti tanks guns on their positions in order to have some decent ground defense.

5) Will the anti-tank guns rotate to hit the tank from the side or rear if the tank pass by?

6) Are you planning on modeling real important naval bases like, for example, the german submarine bases set on France. With their huge bunkers and all?

7) Will we have bunkers with improved damage model. Concrete bunkers can't be destroyed with small bombs or rockets, they need direct hit of heavy-bombs or ship shells, etc.

8) Will we have hard or soft targets with seccondary or bigger explosions or bigger cloud colummns?. Small, medium or large ammo or fuel depots for example.

9) Will we be able to set a particular building, or group of buildings, as an objective? For example, a church, factory, house, etc. Buildings that are already on the map.

10) Can we have whales and dolphins and be able to see them under water or jumping over it? ;).
Even better, can we have sharks attacking downed pilotos :grin:. Uhhmm, better not, this would hurt the pg rating. Sorry, i got carried away by my morbosity. :grin:

Thanks for the hard work!

[zakkandrachoff]

VVVery good post Oolegggg !!!!:grin:






buth i whant external views of He 111

(i don't like fly bombers (i like ME110;)) buth i want compare the HE 111 of Storm of War whit the HE 111 of Birds of Prey)

bye:grin:

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Well, another question here.

Will we be able to set bigger flights in Storm of War (like setting a 7 plane flight instead of putting one with 4 and another with 3)? It would make things way more dynamic.

And will the mission builder have the power to choose the formation AI flights will fly (like setting that A Flight will fly VIC formation, top cover, and B flight will fly line abreast, close escort)?

And one more that bothered me many times in IL-2: mixed planes formation. Sometimes I wanted to set things like a Spitfire leading three Hurricanes, or a single 190 leading its 109 to battle, or a P-47 flight with one pilot flying a Razorback while all the others are in bubble-tops, same with the Mustang, but I couldn't. This would make historical accuracy way bigger, and would also improve the gameplay.

Thanks in advance, and all the best to Storm of War team, good luck on the final 20% (presuming that you are still in the 80% Oleg mentioned on SimHQ).

[Skoshi Tiger]

In the picture posted on the 22/5 The Wellington has 'bent' flaps.
http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/Vellington_damage06.jpg

Two questions:
1) Does this indicate that the aircraft skins can be deformed for certain types of damage?
2) if we have minor collisions with other objects\ground will the aircraft get dented/deformed or pannels bents back?

Cheers!

[furbs]

guys...might be worth not posting anymore questions in here until Oleg clears up the backlog...think we have 45990 questions to go.

[SlipBall]

In the picture posted on the 22/5 The Wellington has 'bent' flaps.
http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/Vellington_damage06.jpg

Two questions:
1) Does this indicate that the aircraft skins can be deformed for certain types of damage?
2) if we have minor collisions with other objects\ground will the aircraft get dented/deformed or pannels bents back?

Cheers!




The supposed damage look's very symmetrical for each wing, too symmetrical in fact. I don't think that would be very likely. Perhaps that is not damage that we are seeing. Good question on wether the metals will develope bend's...hope Oleg makes a comment on your question's.:)


edit:
on second thought, maybe the metal will bend, but only on a fixed, certain area of the aircraft, and any bend may have a fixed angle, always being the same in looks. Other than the props and flaps, I don't see any other bends

[Bobb4]

In the picture posted on the 22/5 The Wellington has 'bent' flaps.
http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/Vellington_damage06.jpg

Two questions:
1) Does this indicate that the aircraft skins can be deformed for certain types of damage?
2) if we have minor collisions with other objects\ground will the aircraft get dented/deformed or pannels bents back?

Cheers!

I think the damaged represents all the possible bullet hole damage that can be modeled on the plane. Obviously were the plane is hit will dictate which areas are affected.
This is the cosmetic damage as far as i can tell, not the destruction damage, like wing tips blown off etc.
My question for Oleg is will damage such as cosmetic bullet holes have direct fm influence. A hole in my left wing although cosmetic in nature, will it affect drag?
Will the damage model be more pronounced. Looking at a single engine fighter in IL 2 I can basically have engine smoke, stutter, stop, burst into flames or explode. Could a prop theoreticaly be hit by an incoming shell and shatter? Just how varied will the new damage model be?
Will damage model from inside the cockpit be the same, a few holes in the windshield and a destroyed gunsight?
If I am in a bomber cockpit and my co-pilot is killed will he slump over or will he still be alive to me?

[KG26_Alpha]

Re: Bent metal skin damage.

Would be a nice thought to have this in real time DM but quite a load on the old CPU me thinks.

The bent flaps thing is the same skin DM the IL2's have where you see peeled parts on the engine cowl and wings in the current IL21946.

I dont think were goping to see it peel or bend inj real time, but appear as it does now in a DM skin.

[Feuerfalke]

Agreed, KG26_Alpha.

And other than the deformation the damage effects are not symetrical. I guess the chance of suffering the same damage to both flaps without shooting them off the wing is pretty much down to zero.

In Olegish:
Possible damage (not at once)

In EliminateSpeculationish:
It's a showcase for visual damage-effects. You will never see all this damage at once on a single plane ingame, as the plane would disintegrated long before due to weapons-effects, fire, explosions, structural stress, etc.

[Bobb4]

In EliminateSpeculationish:
It's a showcase for visual damage-effects. You will never see all this damage at once on a single plane ingame, as the plane would disintegrated long before due to weapons-effects, fire, explosions, structural stress, etc.

You have obviously not flown a Ki-27 with it's scatter gun it calls an MG.
You could sure put that many holes in it with a Ki-27 and it would still keep on flying.
My guess is it might tickle the pilot to death though

[ckolonko]

Hi, Oleg,

I would like to see hydraulic failure modelled in SOW. This would lead to the gear being lowered on an aircraft that has been hit as can be seen in some Gun camera footage. It would also make it feasible to lower the gear manually if the gear will not lower. I think this would be a cool feature both when attacking an aircraft and also having been attacked making an emergency landing possible.

Cheers.

[Zoom2136]

Make AAA (at least and Flak maybe) shoot at plane based on type of planes and MARKINGS. So if a Spitfire as german marking RAF AAA will try to shoot it down.

[KG26_Alpha]

Hi, Oleg,

I would like to see hydraulic failure modelled in SOW. This would lead to the gear being lowered on an aircraft that has been hit as can be seen in some Gun camera footage. It would also make it feasible to lower the gear manually if the gear will not lower. I think this would be a cool feature both when attacking an aircraft and also having been attacked making an emergency landing possible.

Cheers.

This is modelled in IL2 already, also take off gear damage can leave you with one or no gear as you get airborne, you can forget after returning to base from a long mission you have only one landing gear, it gets a bit messy :)

As for the "gun cam" gear dropping that's probably due to the pilot before bail out or extensive damage to the gear locking mechanism, not sure the damage modelling will go that far, would be nice if it did.

[Tree_UK]

Will we see oil splats/smears on cockpits generated from enemy aircraft engines that have been damaged? I have read numerous combat accounts where this happened after attacking an enemy aircraft.

[MOH_Hirth]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqio_JUI9WI

Fast giro spinner, at last in 109G.

[He111]

just went back to replaying IL2, it's still a classic! :grin:

A few bugs though that are annoying, hope they are are fixed in SOW.

(1) AI planes target a enemy plane far off in the distance and ignore enemy in their windscreen.
(2) AI gunners on some bombers fire at open space when enemy is near.
(3) AI planes when taking off ignore if the plane in front is on fire and try to takeoff, exploding when they hit it.

As to SOW, it would be great when a plane lands to re-arm / refuel if ground crew actually run out and a fuel truck moves out to your plane and you see them in action. Seeing resting pilots relaxing in chairs, laying on the ground while waiting to be scrambed would be totally sick also.

.

[Zorin]

I'd like to see some shots of ordnance in the next picture update. RAF and Luftwaffe bombs. :)

[ALien_12]

just went back to replaying IL2, it's still a classic! :grin:

A few bugs though that are annoying, hope they are are fixed in SOW.

(1) AI planes target a enemy plane far off in the distance and ignore enemy in their windscreen.
(2) AI gunners on some bombers fire at open space when enemy is near.
(3) AI planes when taking off ignore if the plane in front is on fire and try to takeoff, exploding when they hit it.

As to SOW, it would be great when a plane lands to re-arm / refuel if ground crew actually run out and a fuel truck moves out to your plane and you see them in action. Seeing resting pilots relaxing in chairs, laying on the ground while waiting to be scrambed would be totally sick also.

.

Yeah, and combat AI is unrealistic, if you fight with jet against biplane, ,,the biplane is better'' ;)

[zakkandrachoff]

wish storm of war will be like, or most better birds of prey

http://e3.gamespot.com/image_viewer/6211301/il-2-sturmovik-birds-of-prey-screens/1/?tag=thumbs_below;thumb;1

:-P

[Chivas]

wish storm of war will be like, or most better birds of prey

http://e3.gamespot.com/image_viewer/6211301/il-2-sturmovik-birds-of-prey-screens/1/?tag=thumbs_below;thumb;1

:-P

I'm very impressed with the terrain shots in IL-2 BOP. They are by far the best I've seen in any flight sim, but I believe SOW will be even better. I'm also interested in seeing how the BOP terrain looks at 100M.

[Tree_UK]

The Bop terrain looks very very much like the SOW terrain that Oleg ditched and restarted in 2007. So it should be a whole lot better.:grin::grin:

[Foo'bar]

Very impressing screenshots!

[proton45]

I'm very impressed with the terrain shots in IL-2 BOP. They are by far the best I've seen in any flight sim, but I believe SOW will be even better. I'm also interested in seeing how the BOP terrain looks at 100M.

I'm just stating opinion here...But I'll bet that when Oleg starts posting "in-game" screen shots we are all going to be quite pleased with what we see.


The Bop terrain looks very very much like the SOW terrain that Oleg ditched and restarted in 2007. So it should be a whole lot better.:grin::grin:

I have thought that perhaps this was a reason why Oleg was keeping the "in-game" "up-dates" under wraps...it did seem that some of the game/map moders where "influenced" by the new "SoW BoB" look. Didn't someone use one of the map tiles that Oleg posted? Ball-zay... :)

Anyway... A QUESTION for Oleg...Hello!

I'm really curious about the distance at which detail will be visible? How will this be handled? How are you going to deal with the issue of buildings "popping into view"? How far are we going to be able to see details? This is a real immersion issue with me...Thanks!

[Bobb4]

Anyway... A QUESTION for Oleg...Hello!

I'm really curious about the distance at which detail will be visible? How will this be handled? How are you going to deal with the issue of buildings "popping into view"? How far are we going to be able to see details? This is a real immersion issue with me...Thanks!

+1
Also clouds popping into view as well, another IL2 trait I hope SOW will end for good

[steppie]

Will the BOB have a more realistic engine modeling.

A present in 1946 i can run the engine Maximum power and RPM all day as long as i cool it when it over heats i will not have a problem. During the battle of britain both the spitfire and hurries only would last about 2 minutes and emergany war power and had wire across the throttle control that the pilot had to brake to engage EWP.In the years during ww2 the engine were very fragile and prone to braking down and had to be managed and it not a lot they have to do is but it would be good to know that if i don't lower the engine RPM and boost going to the battle and leaving the battle.

Will the early spitfires and hurries have the de havilland two speed prop pitch instead on the rotol constant speed propellers.

And will there be a engine run to were you have to test for propllers that run away and other test to make sure every is running ok and also the be about to switch the constant speed propeller off when they do loss control or get damaged.

With IL2 the time a engine can run when over heat has been modeled in as a preset time no mater how hard i run the engine or the height and weather condition. Will this be variable depending on the condition and make were if you don't check gauges you will damage the engines.

[KG26_Alpha]

Will the BOB have a more realistic engine modeling.

A present in 1946 i can run the engine Maximum power and RPM all day as long as i cool it when it over heats i will not have a problem. During the battle of britain both the spitfire and hurries only would last about 2 minutes and emergany war power and had wire across the throttle control that the pilot had to brake to engage EWP.In the years during ww2 the engine were very fragile and prone to braking down and had to be managed and it not a lot they have to do is but it would be good to know that if i don't lower the engine RPM and boost going to the battle and leaving the battle.

Will the early spitfires and hurries have the de havilland two speed prop pitch instead on the rotol constant speed propellers.

And will there be a engine run to were you have to test for propllers that run away and other test to make sure every is running ok and also the be about to switch the constant speed propeller off when they do loss control or get damaged.

With IL2 the time a engine can run when over heat has been modelled in as a preset time no mater how hard i run the engine or the height and weather condition. Will this be variable depending on the condition and make were if you don't check gauges you will damage the engines.

+1

IL2 has some degree of engine damage due to overheat probably dependant on aircraft and map type.

Take a TB3 on the Kalkin Gol Map, set all realism switches on, 25 % fuel 28 x100 fabs climb to 500m, , make a target for yourself to attack say 4-5 grids there and back (not too far).

You cant run over 59% power if you overheat whilst climbing, your engines will degrade so much you wont make it back to base, they need constant management to avoid damaging them even firing the extinguishers to cool them helps :)

Now whether this is a feature or a bug in the maps ambient temperature I'm not sure but it shows IL2 has overheat modelled to engine damage in varying degrees.

[Skoshi Tiger]

Will the BOB have a more realistic engine modeling.

A present in 1946 i can run the engine Maximum power and RPM all day as long as i cool it when it over heats i will not have a problem. During the battle of britain both the spitfire and hurries only would last about 2 minutes and emergany war power and had wire across the throttle control that the pilot had to brake to engage EWP.In the years during ww2 the engine were very fragile and prone to braking down and had to be managed and it not a lot they have to do is but it would be good to know that if i don't lower the engine RPM and boost going to the battle and leaving the battle.

Will the early spitfires and hurries have the de havilland two speed prop pitch instead on the rotol constant speed propellers.

And will there be a engine run to were you have to test for propllers that run away and other test to make sure every is running ok and also the be about to switch the constant speed propeller off when they do loss control or get damaged.

With IL2 the time a engine can run when over heat has been modeled in as a preset time no mater how hard i run the engine or the height and weather condition. Will this be variable depending on the condition and make were if you don't check gauges you will damage the engines.

Engine abuse and the resulting engine life is an extremely variable thing. It doesn't have set rules like over heat for 2 minutes and the engine will stop.

I was fortunate enough to experience a party a long time ago in Australia's Northern Territory. As part of the 'Entertainment' some of the locals had a old GM Holden red motor (186ci straight 6) set up on a stand without a raidiator. They drained the oil from the crank case, fired her up and jamed the throttle wide open, and then everyone stood back and drank Bundie Rum and and made bets on how long the motor would last.

The problem was the engine just wouldn't stop. It just kept on going and going until some one poured a hand full of sand in the oil filler. Even then it took another 3-4 minutes to finally die!

Now is every Holden Red motor going to put up with that kind of abuse? No! Definately not.

In a flight sim having extremely restrictive over heating/engine damage model is just as inaccurate as an overly forgiving engine damage model.

Also one of the reasons they had the wire was to inform the ground crew that the engine had been run at combat power level. So that they could check for damage. It wasn't a given that the engine would be damaged.

[Blackdog_kt]

A good and realistic compromise would be to go by what was standard operating procedure, as this was usually decided by the test crews who would stress the engine to its limits so that the pilot wouldn't have nasty surprises in battle.

For example, i've flown the Spitfire add-on for MS FSX in a friend's PC. We have spitfires running around with throttles wide open in IL2, but in reality the maximum continuous boost allowed was +8lbs. You could exceed that but you had to keep an eye on the temperature gauges and then let it cool down, which adds another very important dimension to air combat...making sure your motor is cool before the fight so you can abuse it for a couple of minutes. This would also end the unrealistic continuous furballing, because people would have to disengage to cool their engines every now and then.

Another thing is that just because the throttle lever has a certain amount of travel, you don't need to jam it wide open to take off. Manifold pressure is a function of external air pressure, you need less throttle to achieve a certain power setting at low altitude than you would need when you go up at altitude. For example, in the Spitfire add on i talked about you only needed to move the throttle about 60-70% of the way in to achieve take off power, maybe even less, because there's enough outside air pressure to give you the manifold pressure you need.

This would also have a very good side effect of balancing the sides in a realistic manner. The allies had better performing or easier to control aircraft, but most of them had manual engine systems. The axis on the other hand had aircraft that might be less maneuverable than a spitfire and slower than a P47 at altitude, but the pilots usually didn't have to touch anything apart from the throttle.

What we have now in IL2 is exactly the opposite of what happened in reality, FW190 pilots using manual pitch to get what was the historical performance of their rides on automatic settings, while P47s cruise around on WEP and 100% pitch while in reality they had to monitor manifold pressure, RPM, intercoolers, radiators and turbo-supercharger speeds. I'm not complaining for what is an inherent disadvantage of a 10 year old engine that never the less scaled really well to more modern PCs along the years, but i would like to see it changed in BoB:SoW. It would be cool to fly by the engine instruments instead of the % pop up messages that appear when moving the throttle ;)

[FilthyPrick]

Does it realy matter about BOB SoW now that BOP is coming out on console??

[KG26_Alpha]

Do some more research in these forums.

or

Take your fishing gear else where :)

[SlipBall]

(quote)Blackdog_kt
For example, in the Spitfire add on i talked about you only needed to move the throttle about 60-70% of the way in to achieve take off power, maybe even less, because there's enough outside air pressure to give you the manifold pressure you need.


This is true, you can easily take-off with reduced power...but I believe it is always recomended to use full power on take off's. I was tought that way, the idea being that you have a a bit more options in case of trouble. Take offs are the most likely time for a problem to arise due to water, or other factors. You want to have that extra speed/thrust available to you.:)

[Blackdog_kt]

I'm not arguing against that, just using it as an example ;)

If there's one thing FSX does a lot better than IL2, that thing is engine management in prop driven planes

[SlipBall]

I'm not arguing against that, just using it as an example ;)

If there's one thing FSX does a lot better than IL2, that thing is engine management in prop driven planes


Yep, I too want more, but the masses don't, so maybe we might get a bit more in SOW, but not much...but also you could easily takeoff in a spit at 70% in IL-2 as well, I will have to look at the man. guage next time

[KG26_Alpha]

Yep, I too want more, but the masses don't, so maybe we might get a bit more in SOW, but not much...but also you could easily takeoff in a spit at 70% in IL-2 as well, I will have to look at the man. guage next time

What did you base this assumption on ?


I'm not arguing against that, just using it as an example ;)

If there's one thing FSX does a lot better than IL2, that thing is engine management in prop driven planes


You are probably correct but you should have said "the only thing" .

FSX is a "sterile" experience compared to IL2.

[SlipBall]

[quote=KG26_Alpha;79967]What did you base this assumption on ?





Just the general words from Oleg on the matter...I think that the third party projects will fill the void someday

[Bobb4]

[quote=KG26_Alpha;79967]What did you base this assumption on ?





Just the general words from Oleg on the matter...I think that the third party projects will fill the void someday

The way I read it he is catering for both ends of the spectrum. Those that want it uber realistic and the arcade fanboys. The only thing he is against is complicated starting procedures. Who really wants to spend ten minutes warming up their engines to optimal preflight temp on a Siberian airfield before taking off to down the luftwaffe?
Okay I do, but hell he ain't building the game just for me lol

[Skoshi Tiger]

[QUOTE=SlipBall;80070]

The way I read it he is catering for both ends of the spectrum. Those that want it uber realistic and the arcade fanboys. The only thing he is against is complicated starting procedures. Who really wants to spend ten minutes warming up their engines to optimal preflight temp on a Siberian airfield before taking off to down the luftwaffe?
Okay I do, but hell he ain't building the game just for me lol

It would really depend upon whether you could be manning a AAA gun while the engine was warming- you know to let you keep the vultures at bay. 'Sprockets' (The lead mechanic) is more than capiable of getting the Spitfire started!

[DD_crash]

I would like to see the AAA reduced from submarines for a time before it dives, This would allow A/C like the Swordfish a good chance of sinking it as in RL (asuming that the subs can dive during the game)

[Mekushikurih]

Oleg if you ll make another game and will not look after it....please dont make it...

[Skoshi Tiger]

I would like to see the AAA reduced from submarines for a time before it dives, This would allow A/C like the Swordfish a good chance of sinking it as in RL (asuming that the subs can dive during the game)

Hey if the men refuse to leave their guns and sacrifice themselves for the good of the ship, who are we to complain!

and Mekushikurih, Oleg has supplied more update and support for the Il2 series than anyone could reasonably expect. We were infact spoilt! Just because they have finished with IL2 to start working on BoB doesn't take away the six or so years that Oleg supported the IL2 series.

[tagTaken2]

Oleg if you ll make another game and will not look after it....please dont make it...

Huh?

Does responding to this comment mean looking after a troll?

[Flyby]

per the title, is it possible to get a clue as to the best resolution to use for spotting bandits in SoW? I guess this has been asked before. No I didn't do a search. Still be nice to know. I assusme a lot of guys are holding off buying a new system until SoW is in imminent release. Buying a good monitor that displays the best res for spotting bogeys could be an issue (?).
Flyby out

[robtek]

Huh?

Does responding to this comment mean looking after a troll?

i believe that person is very young and because of that unable to concentrate for more than 15 min. at anything.
Therefore that person isn´t aware how long this game exists and how much oleg has done for it.
It might have taken those 15 min. to install the game, find this forum and post.
Maybe we wont hear anymore from there?

[Mekushikurih]

yes he done so much that we have sniper bomber gunners and it cant be fixed...

[flyingbullseye]

yes he done so much that we have sniper bomber gunners and it cant be fixed...

Stay with us on this one, focus bro focus. He's working on SOWBOB! Why spend any more time on the old flight sim when he can put the finishing touches on the new one? Try downloading some new mods for Il2 or keep moving when attacking bombers, don't sit on their six.

Flyingbullseye

[Skoshi Tiger]

yes he done so much that we have sniper bomber gunners and it cant be fixed...

Attacking a bomber from, the rear was always dangerous and the interwar RAF philosophies that recommended this form of attack, (It the pilots duty to press on the attack until he a) destroys his target; b) expends his ammunition; c) receives enough damaged that he can’t attack any longer) lasted only long enough for the fighter pilots to actually try it in a shooting war!

I’m not an expert but try a diving, slashing attack from outside the arch of fire from the tail gunner and try not turning back on to your target until you’ve exited the immediate danger area and put your self in a proper position to attack again.

Also you might appreciate the gunner’s skills a bit better if you fly a few missions in bombers and take over control of the guns. Even a mug like me can get an occasional kill from the tail guns if the attacker is not using the correct tactics!

Cheers!

[Mekushikurih]

beyond visual range,

9 hits only,

all to the engine area...

the rest is bull shit... ah..also

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=79882&postcount=10

they are not normal, and dont tell me that he is looking after the game, if that was a mmo or something alike that had rivals, its lifespan would not be that long.

[Igo kyu]

beyond visual range,

9 hits only,

all to the engine area...

the rest is bull shit... ah..also

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=79882&postcount=10

they are not normal, and dont tell me that he is looking after the game, if that was a mmo or something alike that had rivals, its lifespan would not be that long.

This has been a problem in every WW2 flight sim I've attacked bombers in, notably the BOB section of the original MS CFS.

Attacking a large formation from the rear wasn't clever, attacking stragglers from the rear was do-able, which is why the big wing boyos liked head on attacks, that sort of attack broke up the formation, and made all of the bombers stragglers and easy targets. The Spitfire and Hurricane I think (unlike contemporary russian planes) had bulletproof windscreens, not enough to stop cannon shells, but plenty to stop rifle calibre bullets getting through.

The 12.5mm guns of the US bombers were very different from the 7.xxmm guns in use earlier in the war.

[Skoshi Tiger]

beyond visual range,

9 hits only,

all to the engine area...


Got a Track? It would be interesting to see what was happening.



the rest is bull shit... ah..also

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=79882&postcount=10


I read the post refered to and it all seemed to make sense.



they are not normal,


'they' the gunners? We all know how accurate they are, thats why you have to use the 'right' tactics or they will nail you every time.

Attack from the rear = low or nill defection shooting and slow closing speed - perfect condition for gunners.
Slashing Attack from side = high deflection shot shooting and high closing speed - harder for gunners, also the side gunners have realitively small fields of fire.




and dont tell me that he is looking after the game, if that was a mmo or something alike that had rivals, its lifespan would not be that long.

That's the point isn't it? There are no serious rivals! Development for Il-2 has stopped. But even though we're all waiting for SOW, IL2 still has a lot of life left in the old girl yet.

cheers!

[robtek]

For some people the faults are always elsewhere but not themselves.
One should always do the best with what is there, not what one whishes it should be there.

[Tree_UK]

I have noticed when playing online that when i attack a Bomber the gunners seem to be superb shots they even continue firing when their plane has broken in half. However whenever i fly a bomber my gunners seem to be about has much use has a 'chimney on a dog'. :grin::grin:

[Mekushikurih]

Robtek,

read the whole thread that i referred.

no my friend, it is a problem, using the right tactics is a part of the game but against a fair enemy

after all THIS IS A GAME!

you me and all others have payed for this and we deserve to expect a fair gaming experience.

imagine this, playing online,

you take off,
you fly 4-5 mins to reach combat zone,
you search for enemy for an other 2-3 mins maybe more,
you find a target (a bomber) coming,
you begin to dive,
suddenly bumm!!!...beyond a cloud!!,
a bomber gunner hits you beyond your visual&gun range

i can understand this or some likely situations as a coincidence or as a low ratio of possibility, shit can happen thats normal but,

they(gunners) are repeating it!

nearly 10 mins of gaming wasted, imagine this repeats after and after,

some players are using bombers as dogfighters and there is no solution to this.

my problem is about this "no-solution" issue, and i cant accept the answer no.

we and you and all other deserve this.

[FS~Hawks]

When you announces the release date for bob will you do it here 1st ?
On this site.

[Igo kyu]

<Whining>
Watch out, this is a no whining thread about BoB SoW, if you want to whine about IL*2, I advise you to do it in the thread you posted a link to.

I am not a moderator, this is not official, just friendly advice.

[Mekushikurih]

Watch out, this is a no whining thread about BoB SoW, if you want to whine about IL*2, I advise you to do it in the thread you posted a link to.

I am not a moderator, this is not official, just friendly advice.

i am not whining, i am underlining a inadequence that is obvious in the current game in order to not to repeat it.

[Blackdog_kt]

All games have problems with gunner accuracy. They are either too inaccurate (European Air War), or too accurate (IL2).

The post you referenced was mine. I'm not saying AI is one of the strong points of IL2, it never was. I love this simulator and fly it more than anything else, but the truth is like that. On the bright side of it though, we know enough about gunners in IL2 to avoid getting repeatedly killed in annoying ways.

Heck, even in the new Rise of Flight some people have complained about gunners. They are accurate out to a range of 500 meters or more and that's with rifle-caliber machine guns and unstable biplanes. In contrast, the flyable fighters that the player can use are so unstable that they bob up and down all the time. I don't have that game but people who have it say that you need to get VERY close, less than 100m, to score a good % of hits. Anything above 150m the Spads and Fokkers shake so much that you're lucky if you get 5 hits or so in a 2 second burst. And yet, the gunners can shoot to 500m or so.

I think it's a combination of factors. On one hand, it would consume too much CPU power to calculate G-effects and realistic AI routines for so many gunners, so they use some simplified algorithms that will look more or less ok in the grand scheme of things.
Maintaining a grand scheme of things that agreees with casualty rate reports from real combat is the second reason. Because the algorithms for gunners are simpler than the algorithms for AI pilots, they would be too easy and the player would get too many bomber kills. For example, in European Air War i could kill 18 B17s with my FW190 before running out of ammo and i was attacking from their dead six, they were that bad.

So, the designer has to make sure that killing bombers is not too easy, while saving CPU power for other more important stuff. And that's why in the end the gunners can shoot very accurately and very far, but they can't really follow you through certain attack maneuvers because they are "stupid" due to their simplified algorithms. I have a track of me killing 4 B17s with a FW190A3 in IL2 and they are set to veteran or ace (don't remember which). They didn't even damage my engine. You can do it, as long as you observe the way they function.

It doesn't matter if you come from dead six, from the sides or from the top. Fly in a line that looks straight to the gunner and he will get you. Fly in a way that might be straight but looks different from the gunner's point of view and you will survive. They can't really follow you if you do it right, they can shoot very well and very far but only if it looks like you're going straight from where they are sitting. ;)

[SlipBall]

I kind of enjoy the AI they don't seem to be that uber to me. Naturaly if you come straight at them they will get ya. Vary alt. slightly on approach and you will find that throws them off well

[Mekushikurih]

ok ok ok,

seems that everyone is ok with the game,

how silly and how stupid i am to try to point out something like that!

i wouldnt aware there was that much people who are more royalist than the king...

[robtek]

ok ok ok,

seems that everyone is ok with the game,

how silly and how stupid i am to try to point out something like that!

i wouldnt aware there was that much people who are more royalist than the king...

I think what you are missing is that one has to overcome those shortcomings in this game.
Do you really believe that maddox games are not aware of those things?
Especially a perfectionist like oleg has reduced them and will reduce those shortcomings as far as possible for the game(s) to come.
So your post was superfluous and the tune might be interpreted as "aggressive - whiner"

[SlipBall]

Robtek,



imagine this, playing online,

you take off,
you fly 4-5 mins to reach combat zone,
you search for enemy for an other 2-3 mins maybe more,
you find a target (a bomber) coming,
you begin to dive,
suddenly bumm!!!...beyond a cloud!!,
a bomber gunner hits you beyond your visual&gun range

i can understand this or some likely situations as a coincidence or as a low ratio of possibility, shit can happen thats normal but,

they(gunners) are repeating it!

nearly 10 mins of gaming wasted, imagine this repeats after and after,





I recommend that you fly off-line to learn the AI...you will see that this "a bomber gunner hits you beyond your visual&gun range" will never happen to you off-line, its just not possible...There are a few reasons for this to appear to happen to you on-line, but it is not the fault of AI:)

[flyingbullseye]

Simmer down there dude, take in a deep breathe you'll be ok. This has been a long standing problem with this sim and frankly more than likely will be for other new sims in the future for a while as Blackdog_kt has pointed out. Most of us have just reclunctly accepted it and moved on still enjoying the sim, it sounds like you are a new comer to the world of 1946. The only major beef I had with the gunners is they can get you from angles that are impossible to shoot at unless you are physically holding the MG out of the a/c and aiming. This is usually seen in the dive bombers but still, I just have to keep moving and don't sit in one place. Though I have noticed myself, not sure if others have noticed this as well but when coming straight down on a bomber the gunners usually don't do much, not sure maybe they are just giving up and accepting whats coming to them.;) In any case don't let that ruin your enjoyment of the sim, go download some mods, create a campaign, join a online squad ect just enjoy it for what it is and try to realize its not perfect as no game is and if anything leave it at that.

Flyingbullseye

[Blackdog_kt]

ok ok ok,

seems that everyone is ok with the game,

how silly and how stupid i am to try to point out something like that!

i wouldnt aware there was that much people who are more royalist than the king...

Everyone agrees the gunners are "funky".

They are not totally uber and they are not totally useless, they are a mix of both depending on individual factors and most of all, how you approach them in your attack. It's just that this is almost a 10 year old game and at the time it was made, that's the best they could do with the code they had.

I'm not saying they aren't "broken", because they are. What i'm saying is that we know how they work now, so we have found ways to overcome their "broken" behaviour. Ways that are not only easy after a little practice, they are also realistic and will improve your tactics and flying ;)

[Robert]

I have noticed when playing online that when i attack a Bomber the gunners seem to be superb shots they even continue firing when their plane has broken in half. However whenever i fly a bomber my gunners seem to be about has much use has a 'chimney on a dog'. :grin::grin:

Hey hey hey hey hey! You already have your crusade - the lack of SoW updates and website. We'll have no more of this gunner stuff from you young man. ;)

Here's a nice ale for you. Now shhhhushhh. ;)

[SlipBall]

Robtek,

read the whole thread that i referred.

no my friend, it is a problem, using the right tactics is a part of the game but against a fair enemy

after all THIS IS A GAME!

you me and all others have payed for this and we deserve to expect a fair gaming experience.

imagine this, playing online,

you take off,
you fly 4-5 mins to reach combat zone,
you search for enemy for an other 2-3 mins maybe more,
you find a target (a bomber) coming,
you begin to dive,
suddenly bumm!!!...beyond a cloud!!,
a bomber gunner hits you beyond your visual&gun range

i can understand this or some likely situations as a coincidence or as a low ratio of possibility, shit can happen thats normal but,

they(gunners) are repeating it!

nearly 10 mins of gaming wasted, imagine this repeats after and after,

some players are using bombers as dogfighters and there is no solution to this.

my problem is about this "no-solution" issue, and i cant accept the answer no.

we and you and all other deserve this.




I thought a little bit more on this, and I think it possible that it was ground fire that did you in. Its very hard to eyeball them before you are hit. Bombers out of sight distance is a negitive to fear unless its some kind of crack mod, or lag

[Mekushikurih]

i am not that new, and it was a repeating thing,

just being adaptive does not mean we must be sheeps.

people here insisting about tactics and getting over these defauts. some sad its a 10 yrs old game. but its a bigger shame, having it for 10 yrs and not fixed it.

anyway forget about it, as i stated above, its just silly me and this is not worth to mention.

greetings all.

[SlipBall]

i am not that new, and it was a repeating thing,

just being adaptive does not mean we must be sheeps.

people here insisting about tactics and getting over these defauts. some sad its a 10 yrs old game. but its a bigger shame, having it for 10 yrs and not fixed it.

anyway forget about it, as i stated above, its just silly me and this is not worth to mention.

greetings all.




Still sounds like ground fire to me...I've alway's been happy with the AI, and they can certainly be beaten. As your skill level improves, this will all be forgotten by you:-)

[Robert]

Still sounds like ground fire to me...I've alway's been happy with the AI, and they can certainly be beaten. As your skill level improves, this will all be forgotten by you:-)

I agree SlipBall. I've never been shot from an aircraft that's out of sight. I have on rare occasions been hit by enemy AA. My most notable memory was from one of the few times I flew online where the map had to be changed because everyone kept getting hit.

As far as rear gunners are concerned, my experience has them regularly shooting at aircraft about .6 - . 7 km out. Occasionally I'll have a PE-8 striking at longer ranges while in a bank.

[Skoshi Tiger]

Originally Posted by Mekushikurih

suddenly bumm!!!...beyond a cloud!!,
a bomber gunner hits you beyond your visual&gun range



Sorry Mekushikurih, did you mean that you were beyond visual range or that the bomber was behind a clould when it shot you?

If it was that the bomber was behind a cloud but still in gun range, yes they will be would still be able to get you. Clouds are transparent to the AI (I think!). Like we said the sims not perfect it a thing we have become used to over the years.

Most of us here (I'm sure) would 'like' issues like this fixed, but not at the expense of delaying the release of BoB! Well that's my take on it anyway.


cheers!

[Tree_UK]

Hey hey hey hey hey! You already have your crusade - the lack of SoW updates and website. We'll have no more of this gunner stuff from you young man. ;)

Here's a nice ale for you. Now shhhhushhh. ;)

<Drinks ale and heads back to the old crusade room> :grin::grin:

Hope your well Robert :grin:

[Robert]

<Drinks ale and heads back to the old crusade room> :grin::grin:

Hope your well Robert :grin:


Doing well as one of the faithful waiting for the return of the SoW. Gracias.

[zakkandrachoff]

Storm Of War: Battle Of Britain (PC)
£17.99 Free Delivery
Pre-order. | Due for release on 30/10/2009

BUY


okey, novembre is not to far away... 4 moths

[flyingbullseye]

Storm Of War: Battle Of Britain (PC)
£17.99 Free Delivery
Pre-order. | Due for release on 30/10/2009

BUY


okey, novembre is not to far away... 4 moths

Don't waste your time and money, it won't be out this year. Maybe that time next year (yeah I've read all the interviews).

Flyingbullseye

[He111]

Storm Of War: Battle Of Britain (PC)
£17.99 Free Delivery
Pre-order. | Due for release on 30/10/2009

BUY


okey, novembre is not to far away... 4 moths


ONLY £17.99 !!! I won't buy it if it's that cheap ..... must be something wrong with it! .. :grin:

[imaca]

Quote:
"Also on the sceen you see by two eyes. So the comparison with steroscopic view in life and like you mean by one eye isn't right. We simply will have more complex movement of the neck-head-body of the pilot than in Il-2."

I know this question (will there be transparent canopy frames) has been answered, but I don't understand the reply - Is Oleg saying stereoscopic vision is impossible on a screen, or that viewing a screen with 2 eyes is the same as viewing the inside of the cockpit with 2 eyes? If the later then I can't agree - in a real aircraft when you are focused on the outside, narrow VERTICAL canopy frames don't obstruct your view because of stereoscopic vision. Just as a finger held in front of your face doesn't block your view of distant objects. I still think transparent frames are a good simulation of this, at least until 3d displays are able to overcome the problem.

[Tree_UK]

Storm Of War: Battle Of Britain (PC)
£17.99 Free Delivery
Pre-order. | Due for release on 30/10/2009

BUY


okey, novembre is not to far away... 4 moths

The game will not be out this November maybe next November, but Oleg did say that in September he is going to release full in game screenshots for the very first time, this is what i am looking forward too.

[bigbossmalone]

Hi all
Haven't posted here in awhile, time i got back into the fray.
I've been doing a lot of research on BOB and other WW2 battles, and one thing i've recently learned about, and think would be pretty cool to have implemented in SOW, is the PAC (parachute assisted cables) defenses which were used with minor success during BOB. These seem pretty elusive to find pictures of, so far i've only found a few refences to them, but no pics.
The Brits introduced these during BOB for the first time. Basically, a cable fired straight up by rocket, which then released a parachute at the apex of its climb, and the cable would then slowly drift to the ground. These would be used as air defense, as bombers would have to divert around them. if snagged, another parachutw would then deploy at the bottom end of the cable, producing a nasty drag on the ensnared plane, which generally resulted in a quick plummet to the ground. They were later also modified to have a mine attached, with obviously nasty results for the bomber...
So, is this idea feasible/doable for SOW?
Personally, i thnik it'd be great. Although they didn't claim more than a handful of planes, the main aim was to act as a deterrent, similar to barrage balloons, etc.
Thanks in advance...

[Abbeville-Boy]

Hi all
Haven't posted here in awhile, time i got back into the fray.
I've been doing a lot of research on BOB and other WW2 battles, and one thing i've recently learned about, and think would be pretty cool to have implemented in SOW, is the PAC (parachute assisted cables) defenses which were used with minor success during BOB. These seem pretty elusive to find pictures of, so far i've only found a few refences to them, but no pics.
The Brits introduced these during BOB for the first time. Basically, a cable fired straight up by rocket, which then released a parachute at the apex of its climb, and the cable would then slowly drift to the ground. These would be used as air defense, as bombers would have to divert around them. if snagged, another parachutw would then deploy at the bottom end of the cable, producing a nasty drag on the ensnared plane, which generally resulted in a quick plummet to the ground. They were later also modified to have a mine attached, with obviously nasty results for the bomber...
So, is this idea feasible/doable for SOW?
Personally, i thnik it'd be great. Although they didn't claim more than a handful of planes, the main aim was to act as a deterrent, similar to barrage balloons, etc.
Thanks in advance...


i remember seeing this on documentry about bob on tv cant remember show title i think they also had wire suspended from blimps

[steppie]

Will Rocket, Parachute Barrage Wire be available in the game.
These were air defense for protecting airfield and ships would make for some interesting results

[Igo kyu]

Will Rocket, Parachute Barrage Wire be available in the game.
These were air defense for protecting airfield and ships would make for some interesting results
I think this stuff was abandoned later in the war, because it largely speaking didn't work and/or wasn't cost effective.

[steppie]

I think this stuff was abandoned later in the war, because it largely speaking didn't work and/or wasn't cost effective.

maybe so they were used in the battle of Britain and they did take down bomber with it. It would be a handy weapon to set up at airfields.

[Igo kyu]

maybe so they were used in the battle of Britain and they did take down bomber with it. It would be a handy weapon to set up at airfields.
I think I remember reading about them once.

I don't remember much, which I suspect means they were probably fired on hundreds of occasions, and scored once.

It's the sort of thing which, if implemented in a game without the imperfections of the real thing, might well imbalance the game. If, suddenly, low level attacks on allied (only) airfields become impossible, that's not good for the game or the players.

[KG26_Alpha]

Also.................

http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Bilder/He111/He111H8.jpg

[hiro]

First off thanks for the Q/A. And props (proper recognition, not 4 bladed) to Oleg & his team for making a wonderful flight sim.


For SA, I'm going to assume the new graphics will help out. Say 200 m I can tell the destroyed planes in a row from the others (they all look black until I get closer)



Any information on the padlocking system and improvements over IL-2's current system?

Also will there be customizable padlocking? Like only targest in FOV or assigning priority (such as 1. target firing on you 2. target on your six (if you look and see on there) 3. threat to wingman etc)

Currently I use a mouse for SA purposes (waiting for Track IR)


Will BOB SOW have a config screen for devices like Track IR? (Like IL-2 does for HOTAS?)


Also will snap / pan views have more wider viewing area / panoramic? I remember in MiG Alley I had my views set I could scan in 5 places (L R Sides, Up, L R back).



And the last question is for the SOW series in general.

With the enhanced graphics, will there be some sort of pilot customization (like looks / outfit) ? I know this is probably a distant feature compared to other more important ones.

I want to go for cigar like Pappy B, or Saint Christopher's medal. When additional releases, people could go Tuskegee airmen. I remember reading about WASPS and lady squadrons in Soviet side. (Read in some article in a magazine about French and Japanese using lady pilots, but haven't found anything else on that).

[slm]

I hope the new engine will support multi core CPUs well.
Things like this are still pricey, but what about after 5 years?

up to 960 cores:
http://www.disclose.tv/viewvideo/12647/Tesla_personal_supercomputer_coming_to_your_desk/

[Tree_UK]

Does anyone know when Oleg is thinking of answering some questions, there is a big backlog at the moment, he hasn't posted in this new thread since it started. Would it not be better to lock it rather than Oleg having to go through a whole heap of questions?

[nearmiss]

The purpose of the thread is clearly written in the title line.

Recent postings have completely ignored that title, and this has turned back into a B.S. thread.

I thought to make some efforts to clean it up and just delete a pile of recent off topic postings, but thought better of it.

Oleg has been addressing requests and questions over the past four years. It would be a rare instance, if someone actually posted anything original.

At this point, asking Oleg for anything is probably wasted effort. The BOB SOW is in latter stages of development,which means whatever BOB SOW is going to be... is done. The developer is now in cleanup and polish up phases of development prior to release.

Oleg has made recent posting here and at SimHq, which everyone appreciated. The only substantial news that will mean anything to anyone at this point is an official release date for BOB SOW.

Don't get me wrong, ask your questions and make your requests as your please.

Oleg is a decent human being and might actually answer some of your questions even in this late phase of SOW development.

[Tree_UK]

Thank you for agreeing with me, in so many words there is little point to this thread at this stage of development.

[KG26_Alpha]

The purpose of the thread is clearly written in the title line.

Recent postings have completely ignored that title, and this has turned back into a B.S. thread.

I thought to make some efforts to clean it up and just delete a pile of recent off topic postings, but thought better of it.

Oleg has been addressing requests and questions over the past four years. It would be a rare instance, if someone actually posted anything original.

At this point, asking Oleg for anything is probably wasted effort. The BOB SOW is in latter stages of development,which means whatever BOB SOW is going to be... is done. The developer is now in cleanup and polish up phases of development prior to release.

Oleg has made recent posting here and at SimHq, which everyone appreciated. The only substantial news that will mean anything to anyone at this point is an official release date for BOB SOW.

Don't get me wrong, ask your questions and make your requests as your please.

Oleg is a decent human being and might actually answer some of your questions even in this late phase of SOW development.

I would also add that it possible that the forum is visited by Oleg/1cTeam and the threads viewed to see what's going on, the discussions could possibly be taken up and "chewed over" by 1cteam regarding ideas and suggestions, to have a 1to1 Q&A every time someone posts in here is too much to ask, especially when its the same questions over and over again.

More interesting questions would be:

Oleg can we have civilian/military moving group objects for the FMB with adjustable size of group on a slider 10-50.
Also make the group scatter the same as the moving vehicle columns persons do when under threat/attack from aircraft.

Cheers

[|ZUTI|]

Hi,

I was wondering, did Oleg at any time say if he will support any physics APIs out there (nvidias Physix, AMDs what, Hawoc?)?

Thanks.

[zakkandrachoff]

http://www.stormbirds.com/eagles/images/14_(Jabo)_JG_5_Schwarze_6.jpg

this fw190 is of storm of war?
http://www.stormbirds.com/eagles/images/14_(Jabo)_JG_5_Schwarze_6.jpg

looks fine

[Bobb4]

http://www.stormbirds.com/eagles/images/14_(Jabo)_JG_5_Schwarze_6.jpg

this fw190 is of storm of war?
http://www.stormbirds.com/eagles/images/14_(Jabo)_JG_5_Schwarze_6.jpg

looks fine

Nice pic...
See everyone is still jabbering on about ROF.
The site is still yellow and nothing is new.
See you guys next month, hopefully something new then.

[Feathered_IV]

this fw190 is of storm of war?
http://www.stormbirds.com/eagles/images/14_(Jabo)_JG_5_Schwarze_6.jpg

looks fine

No. It's a random picture from a promo of an upcoming book in the Eagles Over Norway series that you found on the internet. :rolleyes:

[Tree_UK]

Make it 2 months Bob then we will have all the in game Screenies!! :grin::grin:

[Flyby]

I've read that RAF pilots (hamstrung with small caliber guns) could choose their ammunition load-outs (Len Deighton's "Fighter, The Battle of Britain). Will the RAF be able to do so in SoW?
Additionally, will weather be modeled per the actual battle period?
Flyby out

[JG52Uther]

SoW/BoB:Optimized for Windows 7?

[CH_kurkio]

Maybe that these have been suggested before or are allready features in SoW, but here goes.

Selectable guns = player can turn guns on/off. For example you have 6 machine guns, you can turn (each pair) 2 of them off to have more firing time. This is how it was in US planes at least.

If the navigation lights are as they are in '46 now, then the server could have a switch to turn them off, so they could not be used to make plane id difficult.

Server can (another switch) force player to use certain markings and skin/colorscheme. This will help the server admins a lot when they will not have to keep telling people to use the right markings. And since everyone has certain markings and skin this makes plane id again easier and people cannot claim that shot down a friendly plane because it had the wrong markings.

-CH-

[fuzzychickens]

Maybe that these have been suggested before or are allready features in SoW, but here goes.

Selectable guns = player can turn guns on/off. For example you have 6 machine guns, you can turn (each pair) 2 of them off to have more firing time. This is how it was in US planes at least.

If the navigation lights are as they are in '46 now, then the server could have a switch to turn them off, so they could not be used to make plane id difficult.

Server can (another switch) force player to use certain markings and skin/colorscheme. This will help the server admins a lot when they will not have to keep telling people to use the right markings. And since everyone has certain markings and skin this makes plane id again easier and people cannot claim that shot down a friendly plane because it had the wrong markings.

-CH-

This will be great.

Nothing sucked more than yelling at people flying around with the wrong markings - only to accidently commit the same offense yourself the next time you fly.

[proton45]

SoW/BoB:Optimized for Windows 7?

Isn't "windows7" built on the same basic platform as "Vista64 premium"? I have faith in Olegs ability to make a good flight combat game...even if the game needs some tweaking after the initial release, I believe that in the long run Oleg will do right by us. He has said that he imagines this engine will be used for quite a long time. I hope he is right!!!

[proton45]

I've read that RAF pilots (hamstrung with small caliber guns) could choose their ammunition load-outs (Len Deighton's "Fighter, The Battle of Britain). Will the RAF be able to do so in SoW?
Additionally, will weather be modeled per the actual battle period?
Flyby out

I was wondering about this too, If I remember Oleg responded that it was "too early to tell"...but I had the feeling that he was insinuating that it could be possible. Lets hope he can give us an indication sometime...

[nearmiss]

There is a great sim right now with realistic loadouts, BOB II WOV 2.09v

The actual British gun loadouts during the BOB were .303s.

It is an excellent sim because it has the best AI performance of any WW2 simulation, quantum leaps above anything else available at this time.

When you fly the sim you realize just what a tough competitor the British were up against. It is a miraculous effort those RAF pilots did.

If Oleg provides only actual loadouts, it will take some very fast work to keep IL2 users interested by follow up releases/patches. We are accustomed to much more firepower and powerful aircraft.

You talk about seeing the whites of their eyes, that's what it takes to get kills with .303s.

I got pretty darn good flying the BOB II WOV, and it only came from practically running over the German aircraft to get kills.

I can't count the times I emptied my guns and the enemy was still flying, and all the time I was getting hits on him.

[Chivas]

Yes BOB WOV is a very good sim, but the main reason I found it more difficult to get the kill shot wss the joystick settings. In IL-2 I could adjust the joystick making the aircraft a far more stable gun platform. I'm having the same problem in ROF, the aircraft are far too twitchy with the joystick input. I know the hurricane was supposed to be a very stable gun platform but I'm not sure about WW1 aircraft.

[zakkandrachoff]

i hope STORM OF WAR will be somthing like this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXSxhM1cgVk&NR=1

:cool:

I need change mi Geforce 9500 512mb for another? the GeForce GTS 250 will work fine?

:cry: $...

[Thunderbolt56]

Yes BOB WOV is a very good sim, but the main reason I found it more difficult to get the kill shot wss the joystick settings. In IL-2 I could adjust the joystick making the aircraft a far more stable gun platform. I'm having the same problem in ROF, the aircraft are far too twitchy with the joystick input. I know the hurricane was supposed to be a very stable gun platform but I'm not sure about WW1 aircraft.


I think using RoF as an indicator for next-gen weapons physics and damage modeling is an interesting idea. You're flying aircraft that are made of canvas and trying to kill them with a pair of .30's at best and in some cases less. 200m is a long way. The aircraft aren't very good gun platforms in a best case scenario and it could serve as a great warmup for the ballistic characteristics of .30 caliber ammunition.

Gunnery in RoF is easily the toughest part for an IL2 veteran to wrap their head around. You don't get many visual indicators (i.e. little paint chips flying off all over the place), and there's no scrolling chat log to let you know when you've mortally wounded the opponent or parts of his aircraft.

No IL2-bashing here. It's the best combat flight sim I've ever flown...period, but fly aircraft that only have .30's or (.303's), take limited ammo loadouts and see how many He111's you can take down...without dying.

I remember many years ago, people would load up a late model 109 with Mk108 gunpods and have competitions to see who could bring down the most B-17's in one sortie.

Try it with a Hurri MkI... :\

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Well, to shoot down a good number He-111 it's almost a mission impossible with the mark I Hurricane, but when it comes to shoot down Stukas, there's no plane better than the Hurricane.

You only have to close up, aim at the middle section (with the plane leveled) and open fire. Quickly one (or both) wing fuel tanks will be set on fire, and or the crew will jump or the tanks will explode.

I honestly prefer doing this with the Hurri than some cannon-armed Spitfire. As I don't have any mods I don't know how this work on the Mark I.

I was wondering, how will planes behave under .303 fire - will the Emils resist like Panzers, as in IL-2, or will fall like flies like in some movies and guncams? I strongly felt that the .303 shots were almost ineffective in IL-2, and that some movies put them stronger than a direct 88 shell. In some movies and guncam films, planes lost control and fall with only a single, but well aimed, burst. In IL-2 it takes many long and well aimed bursts to bring some fighter down. And if we are talking about bombers, you might empty your guns without even setting it on fire...

[Blackdog_kt]

I think rifle caliber rounds would in reality be ineffective for doing any serious damage, much like it is in IL2. In lower calibers there's too much depending on the type of round being fired, because the mass of the projectile is too low to have any real effect by virtue of impact alone.

If all the .303s had was regular rounds then i doubt they would do much damage. If on the other hand they had a mix of incendiary and armor-piercing rounds, it would be like a scaled down version of .50s. A high volume of fire with the correct ammo mix would mean that you stood a good chance of punching holes in some important parts of the target with your AP rounds, then your incendiaries would be able to set things alight.

I don't know what they really used, but i've read a similar discussion about the Hellenic air force intercepting Italian bombers during 1940. Greece had some Pzl.24s, some were also armed with 20mm cannons, but they couldn't do enough damage to consistently bring down an Italian bomber without emptying the entire magazine.
The reason was that most of the ammunition used was regular ball type rounds, incendiaries and APs were in very short supply or totally inexistent.

In one such case a Pzl.24 pilot emptied his guns on the enemy bomber, failed to down him and was so infuriated that he closed within ramming distance. He got the bomber's tail with his prop, they both crash landed and he proceeded to draw his sidearm and take the Italian crew prisoner. Talk about being p*ssed off that your rounds are not up to the job :grin:

[proton45]

Well, to shoot down a good number He-111 it's almost a mission impossible with the mark I Hurricane, but when it comes to shoot down Stukas, there's no plane better than the Hurricane.

It looked pretty easy in the movie "Pearl Harbor"...

[robtek]

If viewed in account of the effect the spits in"Pearl Harbor" had at least mk108 :-D :-D

[Lucas_From_Hell]

After you guys mentioned it, I searched at youtube just to remember the scenes (watched the movie a long, long time ago).

Noticed two things: the Spits were armed with 20mm cannons, so probably IIb or Vb. The other thing... How the hell was that American flying with an Eagle Squadron badge on the plane and using 303 Squadron's lettering? I'm sorry, but he didn't looked very Polish to me :-P

And, by the way, the speech seen at those scenes were the worst radio chatter I've ever heard in my whole life...

[TUCKIE_JG52]

A quick technology question...

Nvidia launched recently the 3D View glasses, tht actually are compatible with 350 games, and only 2 of that list are simulators.

Is there any plan about this? Could be nice to see BoB i 3D!

Demo of the device... depending on its success, it's a candidate to match the "must have" that represent the Track IR:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pY8yshGOD6Q

Compatibility list:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/3D_Vision_3D_Games.html

[nearmiss]

I think 3d would make a difference for sure, then of course it's about $500 USD.

Since you have to have a 120hz x 22" monitor to use the glasses.

This is so new it may be around December before there are lower prices.

IMO, it would be a waste of money for me. I'm pretty well an IL2 user.

Occassionally, BOB II WOV and MSFT CFS2. Currently all three are installed on my HDD.

The old MSFT CFS2 has a great mission builder tool, and BOB II WOV has the absolute best AI performance. IL2 is superior in all respects otherwise

If IL2 1946 or BOB SOW supported the nvidia 3d I'd go for it, otherwise no way.

[wheelsup_cavu]

I haven't seen it mentioned before...

What about having the ability to designate Emergency Landing airfields for your AI aircraft.
Also the landing routine would have an Emergency routine so it would not try to land normally but would come in straight to land.

Quite often I have had my AI wingman crash because they couldn't be told to land at an airfield near where they were damaged.
I've also had them fly all the way home and then crash because they were damaged when they tried to do a normal landing routine.

DGen already designates all friendly airfields as Hidden Targets when it generates a mission.
Adding a waypoint type maybe ?

TAKEOFF
NORMFLY
GATTACK
ELNDING
LANDING


Wheels

[Zoom2136]

For the server side.

Instead of just having a list of maps that the server runs in a predetermined order, it would be nice to be able to input "conditions", say when a maps end a a new one is loading the server could check for the number of player that are waiting for the new map to load and if that number of player is between 1-10: players... the server could chose to run so and so maps (which could be smaller maps or scenarios (closer airfield/targets)) and if the number of player was 11-20: it could run medium size maps/scenarios and if 21+ player in game: run the larger maps/scenarios. All "sizes" would be indicated by the admin...

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Well, maybe...

But if people join later, and there's already a small map running? The whole thing will become one big hell of a furball, probably.

[zakkandrachoff]

I hope some genius computer people do a Emulator for Birds of Prey for PC !

these graphics are awesome!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AhV8wo4ZIg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tX77tZxJGIc&NR=1

[klem]

Maybe a bit late to come back on the .303 posts a few back but it was mostly Ball ammunition with, later, De-Wilde mixed in to give a 'splotch' when it hit to confirm aim.

It was hard to down the bombers but could be done - remember the Spits and Hurris had 8 x .303s and the Hurri MkII had 12.

Of course what isn't modelled in IL-2 is the pilots will to stay alive and bug out as soon as he got an engine/oil/fuel hit. 109s would have to run immediately as they were badly short on fuel and the bombers also had a long way to go home with a smoking engine.

Oleg better not invent unrealistic weapon loadouts for these a/c or at least I hope map-makers won't put cannon armed spits into the actual BoB scenarios. The few squadrons that first flew with them had many cannon problems and few were used in the Battle, the first squadrons reverting to .303s until the bugs were ironed out.

It was tough. Suck it and see.

56RAF_klem

[ALien_12]

There were NO Hurricanes with 12 .303 guns DURING THE BATTLE OF BRITAIN (I mean until October 1940). There were only Mk.Ias and Mk.IIas. Mk.IIbs (the version with 12 guns) was released on early 1941 I believe. But NOT during the hardest stage of battle of Britain.

[nearmiss]

I like fast prop planes, lot's of firepower, exciting explosions,etc.

The .303s = boring

Chasing an HE111, emptying my guns and him still flying. Just won't cut it.

Yeah, I know I heard the music about getting close enough to see the whites of their eyes. All that means is having to spend alot more time flitting around the enemy, repositioning for each pass and hoping you get the little pee-shooter bullets into the right places.

I'm definitely not excited about full-real firepower and loadouts for the BOB.

Hopefully, Oleg will move us along quickly to other time periods with the great new physics, graphics, etc. of BOB SOW.

[Skoshi Tiger]

To help out the movie makers in our community, How about having a set of monochrome background and sky textures, to help out with chroma-keying? Could be selected by use of a config file setting?

[Skoshi Tiger]

The .303s = boring

Boring maybe but they did actually help win the battle. And think of the Challenge of trying to defeat one of the worlds (at that time) most advanced fighter aircraft with a cartridge that was originally introduced in 1889 with a BlackPowder propellant!

I hope they do have the cannon armed spitfires as well but with a historically accurate reliability and accurate handling when one of the cannons does jam.

[Igo kyu]

Boring maybe but they did actually help win the battle. And think of the Challenge of trying to defeat one of the worlds (at that time) most advanced fighter aircraft with a cartridge that was originally introduced in 1889 with a BlackPowder propellant!
I believe the De Wilde round was in general use in the BoB. I don't know what the belting was, I thought it was 100% De Wilde? or tracer De Wilde mixed with non-tracer De Wilde? The De Wilde round was incendiary I am pretty sure.

I'm sure some exclusively Luftwaffe fliers would prefer the RAF equipped with 4.5 mm air rifles as sandblasters to polish their paint, but that's no more realistic than fitting Spitfires with 20x 20mm cannon.

[Skoshi Tiger]

I believe the De Wilde round was in general use in the BoB. I don't know what the belting was, I thought it was 100% De Wilde? or tracer De Wilde mixed with non-tracer De Wilde? The De Wilde round was incendiary I am pretty sure.

I'm sure some exclusively Luftwaffe fliers would prefer the RAF equipped with 4.5 mm air rifles as sandblasters to polish their paint, but that's no more realistic than fitting Spitfires with 20x 20mm cannon.

I'm sure they would have ;).

I was actually trying to stick up for the .303 round. If your doing a Battle of Britain simulation it's what the british had.

I was just trying to point out that the .303 round had quite a histoy. There is a bit of an article about the ammunition used during the Battle of Britain at http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/BoB.htm.

Concerning the the Hispano cannons. They were apart of the Battle of Britain and they suffered from so many developmental issues that the pilots reverted back to the .303's. You're right they did not play a significant part in the Battle, but they were there. Even if they were present in a Cameo role as AI I'ld be happy.

If if was a choice between a Do17 and cannon armmed spitfires I'ld go for the Dornier any day.

Cheers!

[Igo kyu]

I was actually trying to stick up for the .303 round. If your doing a Battle of Britain simulation it's what the british had.
Sure. :grin:

There are .303 rounds and there are .303 rounds:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.303_British

This is about the De Wilde, there doesn't seem to be much about that in wikipedia:

http://www.1jma.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=3232&sid=064487d98308874f472b946196b14bbf

I guess that guy is known here.

[zakkandrachoff]

will be nice a Do 17Z fliable.

stop talk about spitfire whit 20mm in 1940, ok people!
this is not il-2 any more.- This is a more presisly simulator

[lep1981]

Something I'd like to request even though I certainly believe it should and it will be added in SoW when it comes out... COMPATIBILITY WITH WIDESCREEN RESOLUTIONS!!! it's been my headache with IL2 for the last 2 years, it just won't allow me to see the game in widescreen format without having to stretch the whole thing. :( and changing the resolution manually on the INI file will only fot 2 black stripes by the sides.

So it will be great to have the widescreen resoltuion compatibility :)

Thanks.

[KG26_Alpha]

Something I'd like to request even though I certainly believe it should and it will be added in SoW when it comes out... COMPATIBILITY WITH WIDESCREEN RESOLUTIONS!!! it's been my headache with IL2 for the last 2 years, it just won't allow me to see the game in widescreen format without having to stretch the whole thing. :( and changing the resolution manually on the INI file will only fot 2 black stripes by the sides.

So it will be great to have the widescreen resoltuion compatibility :)

Thanks.

Set this line in conf.ini

SaveAspect=0

[Desode]

I have the same problem and I have that set to 0. If I run Il2 under XP compatibility mode it works but it doesn't run as good on my PC.
DESODE

[KG26_Alpha]

I have the same problem and I have that set to 0. If I run Il2 under XP compatibility mode it works but it doesn't run as good on my PC.
DESODE

Try this as well

EnableResize=0

[lep1981]

KG26 thank you for that piece of info, I'll try those as soon as i get home. I suppose those lines must be added in the same group of lines where the resolution is located, or there is no specific order for them?

Once again, thank you. ;)

[KG26_Alpha]

Hi

They are already in the conf ini

This enables wide-screen with no [black boarders] or <stretched> out image.

[window]
width=1680
height=1050
ColourBits=32
DepthBits=24
StencilBits=8
ChangeScreenRes=1
FullScreen=1
DrawIfNotFocused=0
EnableResize=0
EnableClose=1
SaveAspect=0
Use3Renders=0

[lep1981]

It works like a charm :) thank you very much for this :cool:

[reggiane]

It would be nice to get some more info on the production team working on BOB.
Some photo's of the workers. With descriptions what each persons task is etc.
So we can get a idea how this game is being produced and what it takes to get things done. Most people have no idea on how games are made and i think it would be nice to get some behind the scenes info.

[SlipBall]

It would be nice to get some more info on the production team working on BOB.
Some photo's of the workers. With descriptions what each persons task is etc.
So we can get a idea how this game is being produced and what it takes to get things done. Most people have no idea on how games are made and i think it would be nice to get some behind the scenes info.



They might be too busy for that, good idea though. You can view the team on the bonus DVD that shipped with 1946

[reggiane]

@Slipball
that cd was produced ages ago.
Things may may have changed and not every il2 player purchased 1946.

We have a perfect website here for this kind of information.
To my amasement there are still a bunch of il2 fans regually looking for info here and discussing the old and future game...and not finding much info.
Why not use this website?
It is not like it is used for anything else. Plenty of space left. :-P

Any il2 fan living near Oleg's office? Hop in there with a digital camera and pen and paper and get to work.

[nearmiss]

It would be nice to get some more info on the production team working on BOB.
Some photo's of the workers. With descriptions what each persons task is etc.
So we can get a idea how this game is being produced and what it takes to get things done. Most people have no idea on how games are made and i think it would be nice to get some behind the scenes info.

Scroll down on left side and Click on Oleg Medoks

You may just go to www.spread-wings.ru (http://www.spread-wings.ru), if you read russian.

This link translate the site to english

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&langpair=ru%7Cen&u=http://www.spread-wings.ru/index.php&prev=/translate_s%3Fhl%3Den%26q%3Dhttp://spread-wings.ru/index.php%253Foption%253Dcom_content%2526task%253D view%2526id%253D156%2526Itemid%253D42%26sl%3Den%26 tl%3Dru

(http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&langpair=ru%7Cen&u=http://www.spread-wings.ru/index.php&prev=/translate_s%3Fhl%3Den%26q%3Dhttp://spread-wings.ru/index.php%253Foption%253Dcom_content%2526task%253D view%2526id%253D156%2526Itemid%253D42%26sl%3Den%26 tl%3Dru)

[KG26_Alpha]

I think all you would find is an out of date dusty PC in the corner of a small office, the nicotine stained walls adorned with old creased and well thumbed WIP' shots, the phone would be flashing alerting you to 100's of un-listened to messages which is on top of a Cad drawing depicting the front view, side view and plan of a 1940's windsock. :grin::grin:

I see a perfectly clean working environment, no nicotine stained walls or dusty old PC's and plenty of staff working away, that's what I see in the pictures from the interview.

You need to move on from this constant diatribe.................

http://spread-wings.ru/images/stories/Meddox/1.jpg

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&langpair=ru%7Cen&u=http://www.spread-wings.ru/index.php&prev=/translate_s%3Fhl%3Den%26q%3Dhttp://spread-wings.ru/index.php%253Foption%253Dcom_content%2526task%253D view%2526id%253D156%2526Itemid%253D42%26sl%3Den%26 tl%3Dru

[reggiane]

thanks for the website link nearmiss.
about the picture...
And i thought MY desk was a mess!! :grin:
Nice model of the HE 219 nightfighter in the corner.
Would love to go mossie hunting with that plane Oleg! :rolleyes:

[llama_thumper]

sorry to interrupt. quick questions:

- will SoW support hyperthreading/will it make use of multiple CPUs?
- will it be in a position to use more than the 3GB XP32bit RAM limit? (eg on a 64bit system)

[KG26_Alpha]

sorry to interrupt. quick questions:

- will SoW support hyperthreading/will it make use of multiple CPUs?
- will it be in a position to use more than the 3GB XP32bit RAM limit? (eg on a 64bit system)

Yes

[Acid]

Hi, new to this forum just wanted to ask a question about Sow,

What will the Pilot career mode be like, as in will it have a detailed stats on all the type of planes youve shot down, ground target's destroyed, kept in a kinda of log book, also will it have ranking system and medals etc aswell, sort of like what as done in the old Red baron game's, hope it has a cool interface menu not a bland ordinary/simple one like most flight sims have , red baron 3d i think did it right, or another game i can think of was battlefield 2, more of a Mp game, not a pure flight sim but it had a good stats system.

Thankyou

i hope Oleg can answer this.

[Feathered_IV]

Luthier is in charge of the single player campaign apparently. He tends to favour more of a gaming experience. Abandoning your aircraft to run to an AA position was his idea. Oleg said Luthier talked him into it and he eventually gave in. This worries me. My own ideas of what a next gen campaign should be like are very different to those that Luthier has.

[Acid]

Luthier is in charge of the single player campaign apparently. He tends to favour more of a gaming experience. Abandoning your aircraft to run to an AA position was his idea. Oleg said Luthier talked him into it and he eventually gave in. This worries me. My own ideas of what a next gen campaign should be like are very different to those that Luthier has.


More of a gaming experience?, so does that mean its not going to have any of the things i mentioned?

if so ill be disappointed.

[reggiane]

The ability to man a anti aircraft gun is i.m.o. also a part of the air war.
I always believed the AA-guns stoud little chance of actually downing any aircraft.
But when i see all those wartime pictures of german AA-guns with several kill mark rings it must have been different.
The ack ack was a deadly enemy to any aircraft flying over Britain or Germany.
So it must have a place in the new game/sim.
I do wonder how they intend to put this in the game, a 88 or even a harmless 20mm needed a big crew to operate.
I do hope it will not be a battlefield game kind of AA gun.

I have only a rough idea on how to operate such a gun.
first you need a spotter to pinpoint the location of the enemy plane, calculate its direction,altitude and speed.
then you need someone to set the timing of the shell... at what altitude the shell should explode.
then you need the loader(s).
and finally the gunner himself.
Not to mention the commander,radio operator and searchlight crew. (and the tea lady for the british).
no way this can be simulated in a SIM like this... but I hope they manage it.

[Skoshi Tiger]

1940 - British airbase - one man opperated MG - Hmmm! I guess the most likely choice would be a Lewis gun mounted on a post. The vickers would require another operator and the Brens would be in too high demand with the rearming the Army after Dunkirk!

Cheers!

[Red Dragon-DK]

Sorry If this one have been mention before. But in the FMB in SOW, would it possible to have a copy/paste funktion? I mean if you set up some cind for arrengemen off for eksamble a defence on one side of a base and have used houers on it, but would like to have a simulare one, on the other side, it cut be very handy to just copy it and place it an other plase on the map.

Cheers.

[llama_thumper]

Quote:
Originally Posted by llama_thumper
sorry to interrupt. quick questions:

- will SoW support hyperthreading/will it make use of multiple CPUs?
- will it be in a position to use more than the 3GB XP32bit RAM limit? (eg on a 64bit system)


Yes

nice to hear - has this been stated anywhere?

[KG26_Alpha]

Yes many times regarding Multiple cores.

The other part of your question regarding the ram is simple if the Bios dont recognize more than 3 gigs of ram then nothing else will.

Read the following regarding using 4 gigs under 32bit os ++++ AT YOUR OWN RISK I ACCEPT NO RESPONSIBILITY IF YOU DAMAGE YOUR PC'S++++

When you boot the pc does the bios report 4 gigs of ram.

If it don't see 4 gigs in the bios then XP wont see it either.

If it does see the full 4gigs then follow this:

To enable Physical Address Extension (PAE) X86

1. Open Windows Explorer.
2. On the Tools menu, click Folder Options.
3. On the View tab, click Show hidden files and folders, clear the Hide protected operating system files check box, and then click OK. If you are presented with a warning dialog box, click Yes to continue.
4. In the root folder (for example, C:, locate the Boot.ini file and remove its read-only attribute.
5. Open the Boot.ini file, and then add the /PAE parameter to the ARC path, as shown in the following example for Windows Server 2003, Datacenter Edition:
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(2)\%systemroot%="Windows Server 2003, Datacenter Edition" /PAE
6. On the File menu, click Save.
7. Restore the read-only attribute to the Boot.ini file.
8. For the change to take effect, restart the computer.

Example:

Original Boot.ini:


timeout=0
default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINNT
[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINNT=”Micro soft Windows 2000 Advanced Server”
/fastdetect

Change the Boot.ini to become:

[boot loader]
timeout=0
default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINNT
[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINNT=”Micro soft Windows 2000 Advanced Server”
/fastdetect /PAE

Problem: The computer will not start after PAE is enabled.

Cause: Your hardware may not support PAE.

Solution: Start the system and run Safe Mode, which disables PAE. Then remove the /PAE parameter from the Boot.ini file.

To run Safe Mode:

1.


When you see the message "Please select the operating system to start," press F8.

2.


Use the arrow keys to highlight the appropriate Safe Mode option, and then press ENTER.
To use the arrow keys on the numeric keypad to select items, NUMLOCK must be off.

Problem: After PAE is enabled, the computer runs for a time and then displays a Stop error.

Cause: Your hardware may not support PAE.


[B]For Vista 32 bit

Typing "cmd" in the "start" "search" space, and press Ctrl + Shift + Enter. This runs "cmd" in Administrator Mode.

Then type - "run" Type - BCDEdit /set PAE forceenable

This enables PAE but if you have DEP running then its already enabled

Also if you experience any problems if running a Creative Xfi sound card turn off PAE it has been known to cause problems.

Then type - "run" Type - BCDEdit /set PAE forcedisable

[Abbeville-Boy]

i wonder about this to, detailed records as in rl is how it should be in the game i think



Hi, new to this forum just wanted to ask a question about Sow,

What will the Pilot career mode be like, as in will it have a detailed stats on all the type of planes youve shot down, ground target's destroyed, kept in a kinda of log book, also will it have ranking system and medals etc aswell, sort of like what as done in the old Red baron game's, hope it has a cool interface menu not a bland ordinary/simple one like most flight sims have , red baron 3d i think did it right, or another game i can think of was battlefield 2, more of a Mp game, not a pure flight sim but it had a good stats system.

Thankyou

i hope Oleg can answer this.

[Fall_Pink?]

Will SoW engine make use of this truly revolutionary stuff or is it planned for later use? Would be really great to see this kind of stuff in action ;-)

Thanks and regards,
Mark

[Werner Molders]

Hi everyone,

I know this must seem like a typical post but i'm going to try my best to phrase this.

As far as flight models go will the Bf 109 E be the real equal of the Spitfire regarding the following issues to the Spitfire Mark IA. For all the talk modifications by "All Aircraft Arcade" on IL2 have lead to delusional flight models to support the RAF.

I will be specific on what I as a pilot and a man doing a degree in aerospace technology degree would specifically like to see. These are my concerns on what I believe might be missed in the new flight models from what i have seen so far in IL2.

1. Acceleration

Firstly, I think that we have overlooked some of the situation regarding speed. Pilots often never reached maximum speed in flight, maximum (WEP) power was often only used for short periods and this often included manoeuvring (obviously in combat).

Even though the Bf 109 E did have at times a maximum speed advantage, maybe this is not the entire picture, I have concluded that it was acceleration that was the more important factor because of the DB 601 Aa having the following characteristics:


A. A better and more developed supercharger than the Merlin III (allowing for better high altitude performance).

B. Being significantly larger in size (displacement of the huge DB 601Aa: 33.9 litres versus Merlin III's: 27 litres).

C. DB 601Aa was fuel injected and more efficient with no lack of performance based on the fact the Spitfire had a carburettor float fuel system which is highly susceptible to getting stuck, causing a reduction in performance by gravity's forces. Remember that the G forces would be changing at a very fast rate while in any manoeuvre (not just dives although this is obviously very pronounced) and this would certainly mean the engine was never performing at its tested maximum performance in any other situation except in level flight (inefficiency of around a few percent).

D. The throttle response of the Bf 109 was considered a strength of the aircraft compared with both RAF fighters and this was mentioned even in the RAE test reports. Again this owed to the easy and business like throttle control but more importantly to the fact a fuel injection engine is able to place the absolutely exact fuel to air ratio to the engine leading to better fuel efficiency as well.


To summarise, the difference in maximum speed at any altitude was minimal at best. The fact was in any battle, this was actually completely irrelevant, acceleration was more important as this allowed a plane to get away from his opponent faster, or complete a manoeuvre with greater developed power while throttling up. This was an advantage again to the Bf 109.

2. Control Harmony/Centre of Gravity/Rudder

Sounds completely pinnickity but i overlooked a key point we have all missed here. The Bf 109 E had a "long tail moment arm" which basically means it uses a very effective horizontal stabiliser and also the rudder was 50% Chord which all leads to the fact a Bf 109 could be yawed from right to left by anywhere within 45 degrees! so a pilot could spray bullets on its axis like a crazy .. ah hem... This is exactly what pilots meant by the aircraft being a stable gunnery platform.

The pilot of a Bf 109 (E) could sit behind an enemy aircraft at a reasonable range within a 45 degree angle range and adjust his aim on the enemy using a great deal of side slip (rudder) with the aircraft having an incredibly effective rudder while the aircraft was quite docile on the horizontal plane.

The Bf 109 had a lot of torque in flight (the rudder being so effective it wanted to move the plane to side slip slightly to one side while in straight flight, forcing the pilot to hold his foot on the rudder most of the time) and often the aircraft would need to be held with a little right rudder due to winds and the effect of pressure as well as the Bf 109 being such a small and very light aircraft with such a large engine being very stable yet sensitive. This has been modelled to a small degree on takeoff (you can feel the swing) but the rest i've just mentioned would be a nice addition.

Due to its otherwise great stability (having a centre of gravity that was kept throughout the development of the Bf 109 by adding the exact amount of ballast for new engines or developments, this kept the Centre of Gravity in the dead middle of the aircraft's weight which prevented spins from occurring easily in stalls and also helped stall be docile). The significance of the centre of gravity in an aircraft is well documented to any pilot who has flown a P-39, its flat spins often unrecoverable due to the engine being in the front!!

To summarise this was a great feature that has not yet been accurately modelled. Something of incredible importance if your enemy is trying to make a quick get away in a tight turn!!

3. Carburettor Negative G Forces

I know this is already probably well tweaked but even the Spitfire Mk V's of 1941 with the "miss shilling orifices" negative G solution still had engine performance loss EVEN when upside down in the dive for sustained periods (inverted) longer than 5 - 6 seconds. This should be modelled for when inverted for both Hurricane and Spitfire Mk I's.

4. MG 17 Effectiveness

This is very trivial but I feel that its almost impossible to take down an aircraft with only two of these guns even at 10 metres away! which is realistically a bit too ineffective. To summarise quickly these machine guns should be slightly more powerful than the Brownings used in the RAF fighters as they had slightly larger calibre and considering they are half the Bf 109's armament I quickly noticed just how unrealistic to real life they are. They need to be tweaked ever so slightly and maybe the Brownings of the RAF fighters too.


Again, I know a lot of faff and i'm just being pinnickity, but it would be well received if these changes could be introduced.

Keep up the great work!

[II/JG54_Emil]

I like your ideas Mölders

[SlipBall]

Hi everyone,

I know this must seem like a typical post but i'm going to try my best to phrase this.

As far as flight models go will the Bf 109 E be the real equal of the Spitfire regarding the following issues to the Spitfire Mark IA. For all the talk modifications by "All Aircraft Arcade" on IL2 have lead to delusional flight models to support the RAF.

I will be specific on what I as a pilot and a man doing a degree in aerospace technology degree would specifically like to see. These are my concerns on what I believe might be missed in the new flight models from what i have seen so far in IL2.

1. Acceleration

Firstly, I think that we have overlooked some of the situation regarding speed. Pilots often never reached maximum speed in flight, maximum (WEP) power was often only used for short periods and this often included manoeuvring (obviously in combat).

Even though the Bf 109 E did have at times a maximum speed advantage, maybe this is not the entire picture, I have concluded that it was acceleration that was the more important factor because of the DB 601 Aa having the following characteristics:


A. A better and more developed supercharger than the Merlin III (allowing for better high altitude performance).

B. Being significantly larger in size (displacement of the huge DB 601Aa: 33.9 litres versus Merlin III's: 27 litres).

C. DB 601Aa was fuel injected and more efficient with no lack of performance based on the fact the Spitfire had a carburettor float fuel system which is highly susceptible to getting stuck, causing a reduction in performance by gravity's forces. Remember that the G forces would be changing at a very fast rate while in any manoeuvre (not just dives although this is obviously very pronounced) and this would certainly mean the engine was never performing at its tested maximum performance in any other situation except in level flight (inefficiency of around a few percent).

D. The throttle response of the Bf 109 was considered a strength of the aircraft compared with both RAF fighters and this was mentioned even in the RAE test reports. Again this owed to the easy and business like throttle control but more importantly to the fact a fuel injection engine is able to place the absolutely exact fuel to air ratio to the engine leading to better fuel efficiency as well.


To summarise, the difference in maximum speed at any altitude was minimal at best. The fact was in any battle, this was actually completely irrelevant, acceleration was more important as this allowed a plane to get away from his opponent faster, or complete a manoeuvre with greater developed power while throttling up. This was an advantage again to the Bf 109.

2. Control Harmony/Centre of Gravity/Rudder

Sounds completely pinnickity but i overlooked a key point we have all missed here. The Bf 109 E had a "long tail moment arm" which basically means it uses a very effective horizontal stabiliser and also the rudder was 50% Chord which all leads to the fact a Bf 109 could be yawed from right to left by anywhere within 45 degrees! so a pilot could spray bullets on its axis like a crazy .. ah hem... This is exactly what pilots meant by the aircraft being a stable gunnery platform.

The pilot of a Bf 109 (E) could sit behind an enemy aircraft at a reasonable range within a 45 degree angle range and adjust his aim on the enemy using a great deal of side slip (rudder) with the aircraft having an incredibly effective rudder while the aircraft was quite docile on the horizontal plane.

The Bf 109 had a lot of torque in flight (the rudder being so effective it wanted to move the plane to side slip slightly to one side while in straight flight, forcing the pilot to hold his foot on the rudder most of the time) and often the aircraft would need to be held with a little right rudder due to winds and the effect of pressure as well as the Bf 109 being such a small and very light aircraft with such a large engine being very stable yet sensitive. This has been modelled to a small degree on takeoff (you can feel the swing) but the rest i've just mentioned would be a nice addition.

Due to its otherwise great stability (having a centre of gravity that was kept throughout the development of the Bf 109 by adding the exact amount of ballast for new engines or developments, this kept the Centre of Gravity in the dead middle of the aircraft's weight which prevented spins from occurring easily in stalls and also helped stall be docile). The significance of the centre of gravity in an aircraft is well documented to any pilot who has flown a P-39, its flat spins often unrecoverable due to the engine being in the front!!

To summarise this was a great feature that has not yet been accurately modelled. Something of incredible importance if your enemy is trying to make a quick get away in a tight turn!!

3. Carburettor Negative G Forces

I know this is already probably well tweaked but even the Spitfire Mk V's of 1941 with the "miss shilling orifices" negative G solution still had engine performance loss EVEN when upside down in the dive for sustained periods (inverted) longer than 5 - 6 seconds. This should be modelled for when inverted for both Hurricane and Spitfire Mk I's.

4. MG 17 Effectiveness

This is very trivial but I feel that its almost impossible to take down an aircraft with only two of these guns even at 10 metres away! which is realistically a bit too ineffective. To summarise quickly these machine guns should be slightly more powerful than the Brownings used in the RAF fighters as they had slightly larger calibre and considering they are half the Bf 109's armament I quickly noticed just how unrealistic to real life they are. They need to be tweaked ever so slightly and maybe the Brownings of the RAF fighters too.


Again, I know a lot of faff and i'm just being pinnickity, but it would be well received if these changes could be introduced.

Keep up the great work!



Some good points about the aircraft that I would like to see in SOW...something that has bothered me is the ground handling of the 109, all reports that I have read indicate the aircraft did not tend to be tippy when the brakes were applied. In the original game IL2, this seemed to have been modeled well. In game now, the aircraft is very tippy when braking

[MOH_Hirth]

Will the sistem sounds of SOW be improved? I think is possible new sound channels for turbo and "fly by view" sound or fast pass, if you understand what i mean, this can be a big step over IL-2.

[KG26_Alpha]

4. MG 17 Effectiveness

This is very trivial but I feel that its almost impossible to take down an aircraft with only two of these guns even at 10 metres away! which is realistically a bit too ineffective. To summarise quickly these machine guns should be slightly more powerful than the Brownings used in the RAF fighters as they had slightly larger calibre and considering they are half the Bf 109's armament I quickly noticed just how unrealistic to real life they are. They need to be tweaked ever so slightly and maybe the Brownings of the RAF fighters too.

Keep up the great work!

As an old Stuka pilot from when it was first introduced to IL2 series way back ....... the MG17's were very effective at strafing columns, then after a few patches correcting the Stuka as it developed exploding wings and generally it got nerfed including its strafing ability, the MG17's were reduced to pea shooters the MG15 tail gun is pretty useless too.

Hopefully SoW will give correct power to weapons and it will stay that way and not have "balancing" patches :)

[nearmiss]

Ok... back to square one.

Everyone knows what this thread is about, and it has turned into something else again.

I'm going to clean up the thread by scan reading postings. Postings are going to be deleted with no explanation. I post this so I won't get a bunch of PM whines about where did "my post go".

There maybe some viable posts deleted as well, because I don't have time to try to comprehend each post.

[Tree_UK]

Hi Oleg, with the release of SOW being within the next year is it possible you could let us have some idea of what the system spec's might be, and are you currently beta testing with Vista or Windows 7? Or could you let us know what rig you are currently beta testing on.


Thanks

[Bobb4]

ATI cards have traditionally never performed well with IL2 games. Has this problem been addressed in SOW.

[Flyby]

ATI cards have traditionally never performed well with IL2 games. Has this problem been addressed in SOW.
with the new ATi cards out now (the 5850 performs as well as the GTX285, costs less, is quieter, and uses less power at idle and full load) I hope Oleg will have reconciled ATi issues by now. Also, for goodness sake, where is the update?
Flyby out

[zakkandrachoff]

I need change my videocard and i ask to myself if a GTX 275 or a Radeon 4890 will be work fine for the BOB... i cant wait to next year for know it:confused:


http://grifobrasil.com/forum/download/file.php?id=2&sid=09ae5ed15ba2acf2ef4a1097971ab347&mode=view
http://grifobrasil.com/forum/download/file.php?id=1&sid=09ae5ed15ba2acf2ef4a1097971ab347&mode=view

(graphics and details very high)

[lep1981]

As a user of an ATI 4890, I'd say it should do the trick quite easily... HOWEVER... a year is a year, and depending on the engine BoB is going to use this could change, but personally, for a game that's supposed to be in development for the last 5 years (or more) either of those cards you mentioned should handle it fine. Worst case scenario... plug 2 in SLI or CROSSFIRE mode if a single one can't manage the load OR wait for the game to be release and buy the graphic card that suits you best :cool:

[Flyby]

I need change my videocard and i ask to myself if a GTX 275 or a Radeon 4890 will be work fine for the BOB... i cant wait to next year for know it:confused:


http://grifobrasil.com/forum/download/file.php?id=2&sid=09ae5ed15ba2acf2ef4a1097971ab347&mode=view
http://grifobrasil.com/forum/download/file.php?id=1&sid=09ae5ed15ba2acf2ef4a1097971ab347&mode=view

(graphics and details very high)
Well if you can't wait for next year, at least try to wait until the end of this year. Nvidia will have it's next line of cards out by then. If that's too long to wait then you really might consider the new ATi 5850. It's less expensive than the 5870, but is faster than the GTX275 or the 4890. But both of those cards should work well in Sow, hopefully. Unless you're using a 30 inch monitor (and running at 25x16 rez) I don't think you'll need two video cards in your system, but surely get a video card with at least 896 mb of ram (like the GTX275), the more ram the better (but ram alone does not make a video card good for gaming). I'm sure if you read some online reviews of the 5850 you'll like it's performance (and value). Let us know what you decide. ;)
Flyby out

[JG52Uther]

Why bother? That £300 card will cost you £150 by the time SoW is released!

[zakkandrachoff]

I don't thing gtx275 or ati90 will off prices in a year. And if SOW don't work whit this, only i rest is cry:(

[Flyby]

Zak, don't sweat it. I'm sure SoW will be playable with many cards. You may just have to turn down some of the settings to get smooth gameplay (until you can afford a better card). That's what I did when IL2 first came out.)
Flyby out

[lep1981]

I'm asuming nobody know anything about BoB yet, right? Oleg said there were going to be some screenshots by september (according to comments of other users) and we're almost by the middle of octuber :( ... anyway, if someone has read anything in other forums would be great to know.

[lep1981]

By the way just a little question about those stuka images. The damage visualized in the plane in BoB:sow (if anyone has information about this of course) is randomly displayed? meaning is it just a texture change or the holes will appear in a precise/approximate location where the hit occured?

thanks

[proton45]

By the way just a little question about those stuka images. The damage visualized in the plane in BoB:sow (if anyone has information about this of course) is randomly displayed? meaning is it just a texture change or the holes will appear in a precise/approximate location where the hit occured?

thanks

You should read some through some of the questions Oleg has already answered...you might have some fun, and learn something too... :)

[Tree_UK]

Careful Tanner, you will end up with a ban like I did.

[robtek]

@tanner & tree_uk

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=10650

[Xilon_x]

Hello Oleg I ask you 2 important things to include in the mortgage BOB.
1 - That all the mechanical parts of the plane may be visible and movable doors doors large trucks flaps opening and closing vents to launch defense systems (chaff Flare) opening the door for opening petrol bombs airbrake opening door opening door launchers parachute opening and closing event of carrier air wings in short, the aircraft must be completely usable.

2 - we see and check for each airplane type weapons and to make an interface to mount an adequate defense system and armament merchandise or peoples-soldiers or gasoline or another tipe of transport object.But the most important thing of all that we wanted to ask is this The system for recording tracks.
I wanted a recording system such as that of IL-2 but with more options is the possibility 'to record the first track and then play well on it.
EXAMPLE I takeoff from the airport and my back and landed on my airport and the track record after the game again with the track that I recorded with another plane and take off my airport and I see the first plane and take-off from airport . Do you understand? or you must repeat the question? or tried to translate from English I hope you understand me.

[Xilon_x]

Oleg maddox i see the BOB immage and spitfire not have TUBE LAUCHER.http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e220/Xilon_x/spit23.jpg

This is BOB IMMAGE http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/2886194/Oleg_has_posted_new_SOW_pics_a.html#Post2886194

For night attak is important the lights FLARE i remeber night attak to Taranto use Flare lgihts for bombing the port of taranto svordwish illumination and night light is veri important.

[DK-nme]

Hi Oleg.

What nice news and what nice images. Just have one or two things I hope will be altered, before game is being released - the terrain coloring (has already been mentioned) and the cloud-textures.
I can't see any difference between il-2 Sturmovik clouds and those portraited in the new update images - sorry, may be my fault (I find, that the cottonball clouds look similar to those in the PF)...
Here's more what could be expected to encounter on the sky over great britain (or the pacific, for that matter):
http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/5334/cumuluscloudspanorama.jpg
http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/7925/vpscr33.jpg
(done by VPmedia, I believe)
and...
http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/8026/cloudsfromabove.jpg

...and by the way, the Birds of Prey terrains look awesome. Couldn't those landscapes be altered to fit into the SoW?


DK-nme, aka Lugatz from DK

[zakkandrachoff]

I 'm agree whit DK-nme". the Birds of Prey terrain is much better, buth better since fair away, very close... i dont know.
buth i want to see In Game (England) screenshots of Storm Of WAr.
http://www.simhq.com/_air12/images/air_408a_010.jpg
http://h2.3djuegos.com/juegos/3179/il_2_sturmovik__birds_of_prey/fotos/set/il_2_sturmovik__birds_of_prey-907538.jpg

[Romanator21]

I think we should have pterodactyls for the volcano map ;) [just a joke]

[zxwings]

A Request for Combined Keystrokes with the JOYSTICK Included

In the controls of IL-2 Sturmovik, you can set up combined keystrokes like "Ctrl+E", "Shift+P", and so on. However, in each of these commands, both keys involved have to be on the keyboard. For example, you cannot set up for a command a keystroke combination like this: "Shift+Joystick Button 1".

So it would be great if the Joystick is to be included in key combinations in the controls of SoW. :-)

http://i636.photobucket.com/albums/uu90/zxwings/Combined_Keys.jpg


--

[richardG]

Much talk about graphics. I'm interested in the flight model.

Does SOW use the same flight model/ calculations of IL2? I would like to see higher fidelity model, or completely redsigned one.

[zakkandrachoff]

i have a question
why are a cockpit of a car on folder of Storm of War? i was thinking that sorm of war was a Combat Flight simulator.
http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g260/restranger/SoW_auto2.jpg

[philip.ed]

i have a question
why are a cockpit of a car on folder of Storm of War? i was thinking that sorm of war was a Combat Flight simulator.
http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g260/restranger/SoW_auto2.jpg

Beacuse there will be the option for 3rd parties to make vehicles driveable :D

[hiro]

LOL with the vehicles


I'm laughing in regards to vehicles. While it is a cool and break from the norm type of features, it just opens up extra humor in the game!

It just shows the degree of detail BOB SOW in that we can use vehicles, man AAA, use radar.


Will the sultry english female radar officer's voice be dubbed in? Most likely we will get Q instead though.



future threads:

Japanese / German vehicles driver is on the wrong side.

Shift + F1 adjusts that.

oh wait you have to hotkey "American driver toggle" and press that first before Shift + F1



I jump in the vehicle and start the engine but it won't go.

Map a key to "Parking brake toggle" and press it.




I can't use the JEEP's guns / I use the JEEP's machine gun but it crashes into something.

Press P to switch to the gunners seat. Note: JEEPS, as well as all vehicles don't have auto pilot.




Everytime infantry gets close my tank blows up / infanty blow up everything.

Infantry are modelled to use sticky bombs, since each infantry has 4 pairs of socks they can do this several times. Keep your tank moving and run over / machine gun them.

A patch is on the way to fix this since they can do this unlimited times.









I'm lookin to more peopel complaining that "Aircraft are over modelled! I can't make it to the tree line with out getting hit. People can see my outline in the moonlight." to

"I hate driving jeeps, sometimes the herd of duckbilled dinos runs me over when the T-rex is chasing them!"


and then the usual complaint of ace vehicle AI possessing the old ace sniper bomber gunner.
Getting a plane clubbed out of the sky by a 88 mm first shot is impressive.







And the worst would be "You can use vehicles, but it'd be cool to go FPS like arma!"


Even though the writing was on the table:

Oleg: "No battles with infantry. We are doing flight sim."







-----

I definitely want enhanced sounds. Like I said before. Oleg n Co roll out the Duxford with a bunch of great sound engineers and record plane sounds. They can then to the old school / vintage machine gun restorer (and shooter) guys and get the gun sounds.

Add in movie sound effects mixing (THX or something)

----


There was an page where Werner Molders mentioned soem 109 details. I would like that put for every aircraft, not just the 109.

"Il-2's Hellcat flies like a Wildcat with a tad bit more speed, won't work anymore"


And for 1946 planes that never flew, maybe a compromise between supposed designers intentions with the plane and with current understanding of engineering by panels of experten from different disciplines (engineering, pilots, etc)






-----


Joystick and keyboard combos is a novel thing, maybe not necessary but cool. I would also want being able to put or program several commands to the same keypress.

Like I could drop wheels, and tail hook for carrier planes. Or for the gamer oriented, program the key presses for manual gear. I know the hard core simmers are saying 'whats the point of having manual gear when you can program automatic."

But some like game aspects. Hence the wonder woman view being put in and air quake servers still in existance.


I have a feeling this feature may not be put in.

- Direct X 11 or 12 has to support this with gamecontroller devices and keyboards

- most serious IL-2 players eventually get a HOTAS set up which in that case combat important controls are already set to the HOTAS and non combat important but functional goes to key board or multifunction keypads / panels.

And most joysticks have virtual keyboard with their driver / program control software, so this can already be done.



----


The tube thing . . .

#1 the games not finished

#2 the game's not finished

#3 the sim hq link that showes the internal spitfire's picture, the tube isn't visible at the angle the pic is taken.

#4 That's like saying no pilots will be in the Sim because the recent last fri spitfire pics are ghost ridden or the ME-110 props will never spin because the photo shows them not spinning.

It's complaining that the game is too expense and system requirements are too high, when neither MSRP nor sys reqs are released yet.





-----

2 important things to include in the mortgage BOB.

hopefully I won't have to take out a mortgage to build a PC that supports BOB, and to get the game as well.


Oleg is putting lots of details, so those will be in there. Like the 109's leading edge slats in IL-2 to cockpit open / close for carrier planes and seat adjustments.

We just haven't seen the a/c specific features n exclusive details round yet.

The track thing of being able to stop and add to recordings on the same track sounds like its is a possibility.

Oleg mentioned they are documentaries, movie makers anticipating they will be using the BOB SOW engine, so this could very well be a feature.



-----

[Oleg Maddox]

LOL with the vehicles


I'm laughing in regards to vehicles. While it is a cool and break from the norm type of features, it just opens up extra humor in the game!

It just shows the degree of detail BOB SOW in that we can use vehicles, man AAA, use radar.


Will the sultry english female radar officer's voice be dubbed in? Most likely we will get Q instead though.



future threads:

Japanese / German vehicles driver is on the wrong side.

Shift + F1 adjusts that.

oh wait you have to hotkey "American driver toggle" and press that first before Shift + F1



I jump in the vehicle and start the engine but it won't go.

Map a key to "Parking brake toggle" and press it.




I can't use the JEEP's guns / I use the JEEP's machine gun but it crashes into something.

Press P to switch to the gunners seat. Note: JEEPS, as well as all vehicles don't have auto pilot.




Everytime infantry gets close my tank blows up / infanty blow up everything.

Infantry are modelled to use sticky bombs, since each infantry has 4 pairs of socks they can do this several times. Keep your tank moving and run over / machine gun them.

A patch is on the way to fix this since they can do this unlimited times.









I'm lookin to more peopel complaining that "Aircraft are over modelled! I can't make it to the tree line with out getting hit. People can see my outline in the moonlight." to

"I hate driving jeeps, sometimes the herd of duckbilled dinos runs me over when the T-rex is chasing them!"


and then the usual complaint of ace vehicle AI possessing the old ace sniper bomber gunner.
Getting a plane clubbed out of the sky by a 88 mm first shot is impressive.







And the worst would be "You can use vehicles, but it'd be cool to go FPS like arma!"


Even though the writing was on the table:

Oleg: "No battles with infantry. We are doing flight sim."







-----

I definitely want enhanced sounds. Like I said before. Oleg n Co roll out the Duxford with a bunch of great sound engineers and record plane sounds. They can then to the old school / vintage machine gun restorer (and shooter) guys and get the gun sounds.

Add in movie sound effects mixing (THX or something)

----


There was an page where Werner Molders mentioned soem 109 details. I would like that put for every aircraft, not just the 109.

"Il-2's Hellcat flies like a Wildcat with a tad bit more speed, won't work anymore"


And for 1946 planes that never flew, maybe a compromise between supposed designers intentions with the plane and with current understanding of engineering by panels of experten from different disciplines (engineering, pilots, etc)






-----


Joystick and keyboard combos is a novel thing, maybe not necessary but cool. I would also want being able to put or program several commands to the same keypress.

Like I could drop wheels, and tail hook for carrier planes. Or for the gamer oriented, program the key presses for manual gear. I know the hard core simmers are saying 'whats the point of having manual gear when you can program automatic."

But some like game aspects. Hence the wonder woman view being put in and air quake servers still in existance.


I have a feeling this feature may not be put in.

- Direct X 11 or 12 has to support this with gamecontroller devices and keyboards

- most serious IL-2 players eventually get a HOTAS set up which in that case combat important controls are already set to the HOTAS and non combat important but functional goes to key board or multifunction keypads / panels.

And most joysticks have virtual keyboard with their driver / program control software, so this can already be done.



----


The tube thing . . .

#1 the games not finished

#2 the game's not finished

#3 the sim hq link that showes the internal spitfire's picture, the tube isn't visible at the angle the pic is taken.

#4 That's like saying no pilots will be in the Sim because the recent last fri spitfire pics are ghost ridden or the ME-110 props will never spin because the photo shows them not spinning.

It's complaining that the game is too expense and system requirements are too high, when neither MSRP nor sys reqs are released yet.





-----

2 important things to include in the mortgage BOB.

hopefully I won't have to take out a mortgage to build a PC that supports BOB, and to get the game as well.


Oleg is putting lots of details, so those will be in there. Like the 109's leading edge slats in IL-2 to cockpit open / close for carrier planes and seat adjustments.

We just haven't seen the a/c specific features n exclusive details round yet.

The track thing of being able to stop and add to recordings on the same track sounds like its is a possibility.

Oleg mentioned they are documentaries, movie makers anticipating they will be using the BOB SOW engine, so this could very well be a feature.



-----

It was nice to read. ;)

[AdMan]

double post

[AdMan]

Hi Oleg.

What nice news and what nice images. Just have one or two things I hope will be altered, before game is being released - the terrain coloring (has already been mentioned) and the cloud-textures.
I can't see any difference between il-2 Sturmovik clouds and those portraited in the new update images - sorry, may be my fault (I find, that the cottonball clouds look similar to those in the PF)...
Here's more what could be expected to encounter on the sky over great britain (or the pacific, for that matter):
http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/5334/cumuluscloudspanorama.jpg
http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/7925/vpscr33.jpg
(done by VPmedia, I believe)
and...


...and by the way, the Birds of Prey terrains look awesome. Couldn't those landscapes be altered to fit into the SoW?


DK-nme, aka Lugatz from DK

I think you may need to look closer, I've never seen anything like this in IL-2:
http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/grab0130.jpg
Notice this is all dependent on sun angle as well, the pics you posted look nice but are more like an oil painting. I think these clouds will behave much more like they do in real life.

The fact that the clouds are modeled in such a way that the exact same cloud can appear puffy like a cotton ball but then at a certain angle look swirling and majestic I found quite impressive. It suggests that there could be wide variation of how one cloud can look under certain conditions - where something like BoP, it looks nice, but is more like a still image.

[Oleg Maddox]

Clouds in BoB moving and changing in time.

Some time later, when we will correct all "bugs" and it will be tuned - I will begin to show some videos. But not now. Probably several months later from now. Everything in parallel progress of tunings, like it was shown at the same stages of Il-2 before its first release.

The problem comparing to other, say shooter games - we need to make such things everywhere looking right - on any altitude, but not only in limited box-view. And it is hundred times more complex.

[imaca]

I don't thing gtx275 or ati90 will off prices in a year. And if SOW don't work whit this, only i rest is cry:(
Really? , look at how the price of 4850/70 has plummeted in the last few months.
If there is one thing you can be sure of its that todays top of the line video card will be 1/2 the price in 12-18 months, and that it will have 1/2 the performance of the top of the line by then.
If I think back to IL2FB, the video card I almost bought (nvidia 5600) would have been useless, luckily I waited and bought a R9800 when the price had dropped.
If your thinking of upgrading for SOW BEFORE SOW comes out, you are crazy.

[-al---]

I have a question regarding the recording of tracks from on-line games:

Will it be possible to turn off any icons, while playing back a track, that was recorded on a server with icons turned on?

The problem is: if you record a track on a server with icons turned on in IL2, those icons cannot be turned off, and you cannot use this track to make a movie without icons. The only solution is to turn off icons while recording, but that only works if you specifically play just to record tracks for movies. It's not a good method to gather tracks from on-line games and to make a compilation out of them, because all the time you're playing without icons, you're in a worse situation than everyone else on the server.

Hope I made myself clear.

[Oleg Maddox]

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=10809&page=6

[Xilon_x]

OLEG MADDOX in the BOB exist navy?
ship? battleship? battlecruiser ecc.ec.?
Carrier ILLUSTRIOS?
i ask if you want insert the airplane start to carriers and also CATAPULT SISTEM TAKE OFF FROM SHIPCRUISER example loock this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbUndYVEEJE&feature=related

[DK-nme]

Hi, yes lovely AdMan, and I believe my post is older than the picture you are showing. But then again, look closely yourself; We need clouds that are several kilometers high (cloud-columns), in which one can hide, when suddenly bounced by enemy fighters (look at the bf-110 picture, and you'll know what I mean)...


DK-nme

[Zorin]

Hi Oleg,

I have a question regarding the ground unit organization in SoW. In IL-2 we have preset and simplified sets of the likes of 4x PzII etc. Now, I was wondering if you plan to follow the actual KSTN orders to create factual units.

Here you can see an example I made for IL-2, showing the basic units with actual strength for a Tiger company.

http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb107/ZorinW/panzer4.jpg

If you are interested, I can provide you with the necessary information.

[akdavis]

Hi Oleg,

I have a question regarding the ground unit organization in SoW. In IL-2 we have preset and simplified sets of the likes of 4x PzII etc. Now, I was wondering if you plan to follow the actual KSTN orders to create factual units.

Here you can see an example I made for IL-2, showing the basic units with actual strength for a Tiger company.

http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb107/ZorinW/panzer4.jpg

If you are interested, I can provide you with the necessary information.

Far more importantly, will convoys have realistic spacing, or will AI always be "bumper-to-bumper" cannon fodder?

[Perrenegger]

Hello Oleg,

is the first time that i posted in this section, and considering my experience in flying formation, or in a simulate combat, trying to shoot from the six o clock, i have to remember u about the weak turbulence.

When u are maneubrering behind any aircraft, u have to imagine that is like a comet, but invisible for u eyes. If u going throw the "stela", u cant make any acurate shoot, instead, u can go on inverted roll, or event worst...

With this, i dont know if anybody has nmention it before, but i would like to consider it for the SoW.

This is something that the real pilot know whell, and never had been modelled in any simulator before, military or civilian.

Just imagine flying across the fly line of a big bomber formation, and trying to shoot from the rear positon of them... just to be care...

Thanks a lot for ur excelent work in progress.

Perre!

[leitmotiv]

Release BOB as soon as possible---before the next wave of financial disasters occur. Release it even if it is only a partial solution or just an air-to-air game. You need our money to keep you going---and we'll do it.

[Foo'bar]

Hello Oleg,

is the first time that i posted in this section, and considering my experience in flying formation, or in a simulate combat, trying to shoot from the six o clock, i have to remember u about the weak turbulence.

When u are maneubrering behind any aircraft, u have to imagine that is like a comet, but invisible for u eyes. If u going throw the "stela", u cant make any acurate shoot, instead, u can go on inverted roll, or event worst...

With this, i dont know if anybody has nmention it before, but i would like to consider it for the SoW.

This is something that the real pilot know whell, and never had been modelled in any simulator before, military or civilian.

Just imagine flying across the fly line of a big bomber formation, and trying to shoot from the rear positon of them... just to be care...

Thanks a lot for ur excelent work in progress.

Perre!

Oleg mentioned it many times before that all this will be part of SoW, so just read all his posts ;)

[Ernst]

Hello Oleg.

I dont know if this question had been answered before. SoW ll simulate effects of altitude in no pressurized cockpits? Cause in IL2 we could see some no pressurized aircrafts flying at 7k or more! :confused:

[JG27CaptStubing]

Hello Oleg.

I dont know if this question had been answered before. SoW ll simulate effects of altitude in no pressurized cockpits? Cause in IL2 we could see some no pressurized aircrafts flying at 7k or more! :confused:

Hi Ernst,

Having no pressurized cockpits has no bearing in the game nor in real life. All the pilots have O2 Masks. It's pointless. Unless you want to have the Damage Model include O2 systems that fail.

[Feuerfalke]

Hi Ernst,

Having no pressurized cockpits has no bearing in the game nor in real life. All the pilots have O2 Masks. It's pointless. Unless you want to have the Damage Model include O2 systems that fail.

Besides that it was mentioned a long time ago, that you will probably have to put on the mask yourself. Don't know it this is still planned this way. Some remark was also made, that you should stay below 10,000ft if your oxygene-supply fails.

Again, that was a LONG time ago posted IIRC in some interview with Oleg, so I don't know if this will really find it's way into SoW or if it was just something that Oleg and the interviewer would have liked to see.

[Xilon_x]

Hi Oleg Maddox i read all post i a think oxygen sistem in ww2 plane is importan for realistic WW2 simulator.
Xilon_x
prupose:
NEW SISTEM OF TRACK REGISTER whit possibility fly in your track.
CATAPULT SISTEM
TUBE or FLARE LAUNCHER for night light bomb attak

now look this 3 VIDEO of P47d in FSX very realistic start procedure and loock the OXYGEN sistem.

http://dailymotion.virgilio.it/video/xaou4l_feeling-of-flight-a2as-p47d-for-fsx_videogames

[Xilon_x]

Ciao Oleg Maddox Tank you for BR20 - FIAT.G50 hight dettail and acurate graphic and 3d model.
But i not see the famous ITALIAN HEAVY BOMBER PIAGGIO P.108.
the reconnaissance airplane CANT Z.1007 Bis
and FIAT CR42 FALCO.
OLEG MADDOX LOOCK this document in Russian lenguagge.
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/bww2/p108.html
The Piaggio P108 and 'the Italian heavy bomber and died in a crash in the third-born son of Benito Mussolini ---Bruno Mussolini---.INCDENT.

The Piaggio P108 is really difficult to model in 3D and there are many historical photos online and I do not even photos of the cockpit and the interior of the plane and really hard to find these documents.

The Piaggio P108 at the end of the war, the last remaining models were dismantled and the pieces were used to construct the famous Moto-scouter VESPA 50 Piaggio zip engine 108 was the engine of the tail wheel Vespa Piaggio P108 was the front wheel of the wasp today who owns the wasp has a truly original piece of history that is worth a lot of money.

THIS IS ORIGINAL ITALIAN DESINE AND PROGECT OF VESPA BY PIAGGIO MOTORS:www.vespaclubelba.it/Storia%20della%20Vespa.htm

ok tanks OLEG bye bye.

[LeLv30_Superbus]

What about support for Nvidia's new 3D Vision system in BOB?

The old stereoscopic Nvidia drivers used to work in IL-2. This new, considerably better system, which requires a 120 Hz display (such as the Samsung 2233rz) does not work in IL2 at all. So will there be support for it in BOB? Thank you in advance.

http://www.nvidia.com/object/3D_Vision_Main.html