Ahh pre patch release fever days !!!!!!!!!!!!

Takes me back a bit..................

Oh and gotta love the "Oleg its your fault my PC is old and crappy" gang.

Just go and buy a new one why wait for 1c to tell you too ?

Ask santa nicely its not too late :)

Well, a little Christmas update package would be nice. The update a month ago was only the searchlight/power unit thing - unless I missed something.

A statement on current progress, perhaps confirmation of Q3 2009, would be nice. It's that far away that it's still open to question.

In the meantime, we can at least start running some Hurricane Mk1/109E missions to get used to those lower speeds, engine cutouts and all the other stuff that is going to make BoB so much fun ;) . Truly I am looking forward to flying over 'home territory' at last and fighting those Battles of France and Britain but I'll be keeping IL-2 going for those high speed late war fixes :)

I'm getting older, I think arthritis is beginning to set in, I hope this game is released while I am still physically capable of playing it

I hear what you're saying, but at the same time there's other stuff coming out too- Black Shark out now (if you can stomach the copy protection), and Rise of Flight should be out in a couple of months. If you're dying for 1940 action, try BoB:WoV, there's a lot to love about it.
I put off upgrading for 2 years, then realised I was missing out on a lot of other stuff on my POS.

Please, no one expects to hold more. We want a date certain. When will the launch of the BOB?

Merry Christmas... :) :) :)

Hi guys. Don't post often but visit every day, learn more than I could give etc etc.

Just had to give this two cents before I exploded - you can't keep things in, any doctor will tell you that:

'OH FFS CHRIST THIS IS THE WORST CUSTOMER RELATIONS EVER, CEPT DUKE NUKEM FOREVER, WHICH I WILL NOT BRING UP. FOR OBVIOUS REASONS.

I HAVE FAITH, I WAIT. I AM FULE?


*ah gasp* thanks, won't post for another 6 months or so.

There! There! I hope you feel better! (reminds me driving with of my brother! His doctor said the same thing!) )

cheers!

Thanks for the update Oleg.

The weathering looks great on the Blenheim!
Fine job.

Hope this is gonna be a happy BOB year for all of us.

Thanks for the update Oleg. Happy New Year.... and if you're heading out for holiday then Merry Christmas.

i'm looking at the update now. looks nice, but will pour over them more. Thanks again.

Happy new year 2009
 

Thanks for the new images Oleg.

Although I thought we were going to surprise you with something more than a few images. I would have liked a little more video done what there is to date. Although the video was small.

HAPPY NEW YEAR 2009

Ian Guerrero ;)

PILOTO DE COMBATE (Combat Pilot)
http://pilotodecombate.blogspot.com/

Happy New Year Oleg and also to your development Team
 

Thanks for the update pics - they all look excellent. I noticed a touch of 'wanting to get BOB finished soon' in your comment - we are all 'hanging in there' patiently.

When I was (much) younger, I saw a Walrus fly over our seaside town, then land on the Bay, retract its wheels while taxying in on the water, then taxi up on the beach with a great roar from its radial engine. We all ran down to beach to have a good look at it - the pilot told us that the engine had developed an oil problem. We later saw him take-off in a great spray of water and disappear up the coast.

DFLion

Happy New Year!!!!

Great pictures!

Was that last picture of the Blenheim a Night Fighter?

Also with those 88's lined up along the French Coast, it may make us think twice about chasing that smoking 109 all the way back to it's base!

Even though the walarus is a work in process it's good to know we may be getting picked up if we end up in the channel!

Happy and prosperous 2009 to one and all!

update!?

where?

did I miss it?

Thank you for the update Oleg. Have a very happy new year 2009 !

Yesterday 05/01/2009 I thing i ready in the fórums http://forums.ubi.com/ in the section of STORM OF WAR the Series:
STORM OF WAR: BATTLE OF BRITAIN
STORM OF WAR: THE EAST FRONT (leningrado to stalingrado?)
STORM OF WAR: THE WEST FRONT (?)
STORM OF WAR: THE MIDDLE (mediterraneo?, italy?)
STORM OF WAR: THE WEST BOMBER CAMPAING (berlin?)
STORM OF WAR: SEA AND AIR OPERATIONS (?)
STORM OF WAR: THE FLYING TIGERS (manchuria?)
STORM OF WAR: KOREA
STORM OF WAR: PACIFIC OPERATION (o somthing like that)

O something like that. And today (06/01/2009) that announced is history:-x
“”Internet Explorer no puede mostrar la página web
“”
Somebody know somthing????:confused:

Next time make a screenshot ;)

about smoke, steam and fire...
 

Hi,
I was just over at Tech Report reading about AMD's new Phenom-II processors, and saw a mention of particle testing. I've read that SoW will support multiple cores, so I thought I'd ask if there will be a similar implementation of particle processing in SoW. Here is a direct quote from the article: "This test runs a particle simulation inside of the Source engine. Most games today use particle systems to create effects like smoke, steam, and fire, but the realism and interactivity of those effects are limited by the available computing horsepower. Valve's particle system distributes the load across multiple CPU cores." For those interested, here's a link to the article; it's a test of the new AMD Phenom-II: http://techreport.com/articles.x/16147/5
I'm curious as to how such implementations of smoke and explosions may impact gaming smoothness (micro-stutters) in SoW. No harm trying to glean such info. Right?
Flyby out
PS: although not mentioned in the article, I believe clouds will be a performance-settings issue in SoW. So perhaps clouds fall into this particle-generating topic too?

Mr FLY...
 

Man you do indeed get around - or did you break your tether?

How's bout focussing your investigative skills on encouraging the next release of BOB -SOW?

If successful, and how would we ever know...you are welcome to some of my not currently used PC bits.
:)

Spudley, you following me? :D I'm not real. I'm a virtual program that runs constantly, browsing the world wide web. I look for anything from the arcane to the mundane, and all sorts in between. Still, I wonder if SoW_BoB will's particle generation will benefit from multiple cores? I guess I'll have to "investigate and see what I can stir...er...drum up. ;)
Flyby out

First of all, thank you for this latest update Sir.

I have but one question or should I say a suggestion.


Wil there be a possibility to, when someone is banned from the game for whatever reason (lets say attempted to cheat), to impliment a similar system that is used on America's Army and Call Of Duty (for example) - something like Punkbuster program. Which will then record that person who was banned and add his bann to the servers that have that same software. Practicly a shared database. So the person (cheater) can not join all other servers having the same protective software installed.


Now, I believe that SoW will be very hard to crack, if not impossible at all - but, just as a matter of precaution and a better security system for online gaming purposes.


Thanks for your time.

Greetings Oleg!

4.09 server release?
a.) yes
b.) no
c.) I was just joking

SoW BoB website and forums? when?

:grin:

aUTO rEPLY - oN
 

Dear User,
This auto post is automatically generated by a secret call center offshored in the way out east/west where we can excise some short term cost savings at the long term expense of our customers who are now jobless due to moving this service center offshore where we are excising some short term cost savings...

Please do not reply to this post. Your number of daily postings is closely to being exceeding. Thanks to you veddry much and we highly valu your bisyness. Do not loiter as there is nothing to be gleaned here.

If it takles us three years + to write/rewrite a programme we will not spend another full year attempting to maximize it's efficiencies each time the level of technology changes as it does every 6 months. We must make some basic assumptions when we commence programme writing and stick to it for the most part, otherwise we would never release a (hopefully) reasonably polished finished product. Thanks to you for calling sirs.

Peaces

I am flattered...
 

...a bot actually posing as me? I detect a thick hint of Pakistani accent and the odor of curry. Notice the Punjabi head sweeping whilst it posted the above post.

Again, it is amazing what these bots will try to pull off next!

PEACE

you're gonna get us banned!!
 

LOL!!!! Spudley, you've got a few too many twisted ganglia in the noggin of yours! (admins, I recant my indiscretions, and ask for a pardon).
Flyby out

Release: Jun 1, 2009 !?
 

gamespot.com
Storm of War: Battle of Britain
Ubisoft
maddoxgames
WWII Flight Sim
Release: Jun 1, 2009

:(

and the march 2009 ????:roll:

okey, I can whait!!! buth i want more screenshots!
Maddy, just press "Impr pant" button;) jajaja

Oleg already said that it could be out for fall 2009, but only if the development goes without any problem. He also said recently that he hoped to release the game before 2010. Therefore, I don't think we will see SoW in June 1, 2009 either...

Oleg,

Quick Question, I was reading in Doug Bader's book [I]Fight for the Sky[/I where he talks about how during the battle of britain the Spitfire's ailerons were fabric covered. Based on your work in progress shots of the spit damage model I can't tell, are you modeling the fabric ailerons?

Love the screenshots of the Walrus. Superb level of detail.
Since this is an amphibian aircraft will the game engine allow it to take off and land either on water or land? I expect this is earmarked to be AI only. It would be great if it was flyable. I'm imagining coop missions to pick up downed pilots, with top cover from Spits to fight off the Luftwaffe.

Bombing
 

Is it possible to have a camera view, in the bomb being dropped, so you can review your damage, if you level bomb at high alt.?

Oleg any news on the SOW website?

ahemm

+1

+2

me
 

+3

Personally I'm not bothered about there being a dedicated SOW website at the moment. I'm sure that game development is a much higher priority and I'm perfectly happy to keep getting the odd scrap of information here. Always looking forward to the next scrap though. Hope we can expect another morsel at the end of this month. :)

I agree but a dedicated website would suggest that the product was in its final stages, the fact that there is no website still suggest to me that this will be a 2010 release at best.

System Reqs. & Release Date
 

If we are talking about a 2010 release date then maybe I should go with an eco-groovy hp firebird?

Is any testing being done on i7 processor 64bit OS and are there/would there be significant performance improvements?

As far as graphics cards are going, how what are your impressions with the gtx295 based cards and the Radeon HD 4870 X2: R700 series?

For if you wanted me to beta test bob should I get a retail pre-built system similar to what consumers might use?

Also, how do people report their satisfaction with gtx295 and radeon 4870 with 1946? Does 1946 make use of 64bit os? (sorry noob question)

SOW
beta test is by invitation only (My guess is it has already started. The absences of regular posters to this forum would indicate they are otherwise engaged :grin:).
May 2009 Oleg has said he will release system specs for the game.
That date has not changed.

1946
And no, IL2 1946 does not support 64bit. It will work though, but it will not be faster or slower using 64bit processing or software.
Radeon's cannot do perfect mod, a known issue that is unlikily to be fixed at this late stage.
But other than that both cards are stunning and future proof, that is untill next week when the new uber XXXXX is released :grin:

Radeons are unable to run perfect mod? You joking or just referring to X2? Since i had it run perfect with no problems (on single GPU cards) i hope you are joking. Or are we thinking of different things, could be. But a very old card of mine (x850XT) was running perfect quite fine.

Perhaps it's just a reference to Radeons not being able to display the water=3 setting? I think that's on old Radeon issue. Otherwise, Perfect should be the same for both GPU types.
It's got to be tough trying to build a new system with SoW in mind. One day Oleg will release recommended computer specs, nevermind the minimum. Everyone online has the minimum system now! :D
Flyby out

My bad, it was the water issue I was referring too. It can run Perfect mode just not water = 3 or 4.
Sorry for the confusion.
But honestly if i was buying a card to play the game i would wait till game launch. Add to that the confusion around the i7 and then throw in Windows 7, directx 11 and everything is up for grabs :grin::grin:;)

Hello Oleg, I would have a few interesting questions, hopefully they haven't been answered but I've read the thread from 100th page and it wasn't there so..

Will SoW support OpenCL (ATI GPGPU) and/or Nvidia PhysX for physics acceleration?

And if it does, I had a brilliant idea which would truly be a revolutionary thing, just what you are looking for!

Being a huge damage model fanatic, my favourite past-time is wrecking things in games that have very good damage model.

So I though that what if you take those soft materials seen in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxOBhnF4aRc Mirror's Edge with PhysX enabled and harness it to enhance damage model. What I had in mind was to make it completely dynamic using the principle seen in that clip.

In other words, there would be materials that have the same properties as in real life. And from those materials you would build planes, like from lego bricks, with some exceptions ofcourse, like the engine, weapons, or miscellanceous interior parts. Since the materials will behave like in real life, you won't need to do anything else. It will do the rest, dynamically. Flexing and bending of the airframe from surrounding forces, extremely realistic shattering and tearing of every imaginable part of the plane, they will all be dynamically generated because every material will have unique properties, and they will act accordingly. This will also accurately simulate late war for Germany, when their quality got worse and worse, and so did materials.

Also right now you can say that damage model is not quite there yet. Sure, there are different kinds of damage that can happen, and you can have holes in different parts of the plane, but under the surface they're all artificial. You have the same texture for damage, copied over the surface of the plane, but they're all same, and their effects are all scripted too. It's less work to implement it this way, but in the long run my way could save a whole heap of work, and since it's dynamic it also has immeasurable potential.

When expanding SoW, it would be enough to model a plane and add "materialistic properties" to key parts. Surface which is made of thin metal sheet, armor plating, a framework structure inside the plane which is made of wood or metal, rubber, wiring, cables, plastic, fluids, what else do you want to model in? And that's it. It will then be 100% compatible with whatever you want to do. You will be able to destroy each part differently every time, and every type of ammunition will act realistically on impact by only assigning correct properties to it. That would also allow you to perfect the planes later on, when you'll have more resources. And in the future, you can migrate the framework and make it prettier, nothing more you'll need to do since it'll all be there already.

So now you will have bullets shattering and ricochetting inside the structure, causing even more damage if that dynamically calculated splinter punctures your gas tank, making it leak so that the next bullet may ignite the fuel by causing a spark. Even unthinkable little thing could be done with extreme realism, but with little effort, such as flak jackets for crew. Then it will actually serve a purpose, as it will save lives by absorbing debris flying around the compartment when you get hit, now it would be useless because only direct hits are in, which would kill anything instantly, flak jacket or not. And AA, oh boy, that'll be even deadlier hearing all the shrapnel zipping past your plane. Everything imaginable could happen, exactly as in real life. Not only things that programmers have added. Like a sandbox, you are given the tools but outcome is in no way pre-determined, you only have rules that prevent from going outside the box.

And if you wanted to take this even further, you could also model aerodynamics. So now you have not only a plane that is shredded beautifully into ribbons, but ribbons that also spin nicely as they fall down.
Your aircraft could be literally like a flying sieve, but still hanging in there because your critical components are still somehow operational. Not like in IL-2 for example, where to me the damage model seems like it was like "plane divided into sections, when a section's hitpoints reach 0, whole plane violently explodes". Just imagine the possibilities! I've always dreamed to get killed in a flight sim like one German ace whose name I cannot remember. He landed his plane but was found dead, because a bullet had pierced his whole plane from back to front, went through the armor plate behind pilot's seat and hit his heart. It's one in a million but it could be possible, now imagine that with a 20mm cannon round :-P
And what's more, if aerodynamics were featured, people could design their own planes, and try to make them as sturdy as possible, while still being able to fly. Like a physics playground with a flight sim built around it.


To sum it up, it's like having planes, ammunition, things like that, made of clay. You can bang em, and they will deform. Stick it with a pencil and there will be a hole. Try lifting it and the plane will snap in half because you had too many holes in there, so the clay couldn't stay uniform. Put a cracker next to it and you'll only find tiny crumbles all over the place once crackler's done. It's a fantasy I've had a very, very long time, and it's very possible to make it reality with today's technology. Guess I still have a little boy inside of me ;)
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=5960 It wouldn't be too far from that vid posted there, allthough graphics just can't be as great. 0:12-0:15 is especially beautiful, even more impressive is 1:13-1:21, and pretty ok between 2:45-3:28, that's what I hunger for. And hell, it could be done, if damage model behaved "clay-like", as I described in this paragraph. All those particles and debree would be generated on the fly, according how materials will react to forces directed at it, and thus damage taken.. NOT "hey look, your engine took 40 damage from a random direction, let's add an animation where part of your cowling breaks off LOL and some smoke for bling" :| Which ofcourse would not accurately display what would actually happen, because it's a general purpose animation for engine damage.

Oh and I registered just to post this crap. I hope you will take your time and read the whole thing through. Not all of it might be completely clear, but you get the idea anyway, use your imagination.

Also if some moderator could remove that youtube embedded -thing, I would highly appreciate it. Also editing seems to be malfunctioning at the moment, I almost destroyed all of my post.

Why stop short...
 

Jamake,
Most of us do not expect SOW release any time in the distant future. We might wish otherwise but it has been in the makings for so long and although the few images appear quite interesting they are primarily individually/partially modelled items. We have yet to see anything in motion and my guess the in motion dynamics as well as terrain and flight modelling are the hard parts.

Your wish list would seem to preclude a release for another 5-10 years. If we must wait that long many of us bothering to post will likely not be at our Sticks...:(.
You forgot to add to your wish list, aroma release to immerse the virtual pilot, full seat cockpit rumble and shake, options to utilize the J Tube mid flight, vomit artifacts in cockpit, I could add to the list but alas I must refrain..:).
I must scarmble my crew as Flyby is buzzing the field outside and is threatening to rake the civilians with his 50cals, and would you allow that to happen?

That soft materiel damage model stuff would be great for blowing away parachutes or Aunt Greta's laundry on the line (lol)... :)

Ah yes, like lambs to the slaughter! Come! Rise upwards and meet the agent of the Grim Reaper. Young maidens will weep at your departure as I send you on to Paradise where you will be sated by a 72 year-old virgin!
Flyby out

Sick...sick...even sicker...
 

... like lambs to the slaughter......to Paradise where you will be sated by a 72 year-old virgin!

YOU ARE ONE SICK BASTIGE :)

Instead of one 72 YO unwelcome virgin, may I have instead a 3 24 YO's or 2 36 YO's...any combination except the first, and mandatory you swap the vir-gina-l for attractive and healthy (virginity is optional and even questional as to intrinsic value)?

and sicker still...
 

Sorry, but due to a recent run, all that remains are older models. Amongst these 72 years is considered youthful. Once the dentures come out and you're being gummed into spasmodic bliss you'll think age is just a number. What's to complain about? Be of good cheer! It's Paradise. Enjoy. ;)
Flyby out

Oleg --- Please, please post something, to stop this fantasy going any further.

Fantasy...
 

...Fantasy to some>> (Insert FLYBLYS name here) and NIGHTMARE to others (Insert the rest of the world - mostly)..

Ashes, Do you think this will turn Olegs hand? If so let me know as I will do my part for the team.

When it comes to the 72 YO, 72 LB sacrificial ogre, let's just say this is FLYBYS job as he was the sole applicant to volunteer for this duty.

TL;DR

and I would suggest Oleg do the same

Well if Oleg was ADHD generation such as yourself, he couldn't have made IL-2 to begin with ;)

you honor me, but...
 

Ashes, count me in too. One for the team.
Flyby out

DX 11.0, a good read
 

Hi Oleg
I have enclosed a link to AnandTech's article on DX 11.0. It seems to be a hopeful application. I am wondering, along those lines if SoW-BoB will support OpenGL 3.0 and DX 10.1? With DX10.1 certain aspects of DX 11 make it backwards compatible with 10.1. This means that Windows Vista will support some of those aspects (but never will WinXP). I'm not too familiar with what OpenGL brings to the party.
Anyway, I thought you might want to take a minute and give us a little feedback on what you think of the new DX API and how it might (one day) apply to your work.
Flyby out
oh, here's the link: http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3507&p=1

If I remember right SOW is an OpenGL game... I believe Oleg said something on that issue long ago (too bad for everyone who has been drooling over all the beautiful DX10 demo videos). I'm not trying to sound condescending but this [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenGL_3.0#OpenGL_3.0 ] is always one place to start your research... :)

dear Proton,
Are you saying that SOW will not run in DX mode ala IL2? WIll it support OGL 3.0? I'll do a search and see what I can find, but my question to Oleg still stands as I think it's an appropriate on.
Flyby out

Hi Oleg:
I just want to ask a question about my joystick.
I know the hardware problems may not be fit in this forum but I think it maybe a software problem, so ....

Look at this thread please:
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=6144

if you can give me some useful suggestions ,thanks a lot!

:-)

Defiant is A.I.?why?
 

why the Day and Night-fighter Defiant F. Mk I is A.I.(not flyable)??? and the Gladiator is flyable, if the Gladiator was not in combat in the battle of britain and the Defiant shot down many Bf110 and bombers.
Defiant Flyable pls!
Olegg, please , check it!!!:-x

Ya, I think Oleg said that SOW will be optimized for OpenGL...sorry

Probably because the Defiant was not a pilot's fighting aircraft. The pilot was a taxi driver in the Defiant, it was the rear-gunner who did all the shooting in that plane. I don't believe they even tried fitting forward firing guns to it, so there's not even a one-off historical prototype to base a plane on, unlike the i15p. If you wanted to fly the Defiant, you'd either sit there and let the gunner do the shooting, or like the IL*2 itself, let the AI fly while you take over the guns. The Defiant wasn't like the WW1 Bristol Fighter.

multi GPU planning?
 

I wonder if Oleg and Nvidia are working on the SLi aspect of this sim. Since individual game performance with dual GPUs is still tied to driver support I would hope this is being tended to. BTW don't want to forget ATi's Crossfire either. Same story. Lucid's Hydra probably won't get here soon enough for dual GPU owners.

SOW:BOB Pre-Orders
 

Newegg is taking pre-orders of SOW:BOB.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16832138010

That's something I haven't seen posted.

ya, its been up their for over a year...

Oleg will definitely need to look at all ways to improve fps. I have a decent system and I'm surprised at how much the Slovakia, and Canons Chan Map tax my system. I doubt these maps have as much as a quarter of the detail of the SOW map. I haven't seen much advancement in computer capabilities over the last few years so SOW code will have to be really good to run on average computers. Although we will have the option to turn down details.

then maybe some PhysX support might prove handy. But I think the code has been "done" for some time now. Maybe just adding odds and ends to it now. At least SoW will support multiple cores (fingers crossed).
Flyby out

If I remember correctly Oleg made mention that SOW will support multi core (dual), guessing quad support will exist as well. My big concern is the cpu eating ground vechile detail (not terrain) that for the most part will be lost on us causing lower fps.

Flyingbullseye

I don't know a lot about the physics cards, but don't they calculate collisions (gravity effects & inertia) and things bouncing around? I'm not sure what kind of calculations a physics card would be useful for in a flight sim? It seems to me that the bottle necks in processing power are in visual calculations and damage calculations... :)

re: PhysX
 

Well, the damage calculations, and other special effects like drifting smoke, bomb blasts and the sort might all benefit from PhysX implementation. NVidia now makes PhysX a software implementation on it's GPUs. This link sort of explains it, and does so much better than I.
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2340015,00.asp
As I recall, AMD/ATi have their own version, so once again here we go with the Crossfire vs SLi thing. No common standard except maybe OpenCL. I bet sim developers are way behind the curve on this stuff.

Oh, Flyingbullseye, I agree with you. Too many cpu-cycle-sucking ground objects may have a negative effect on smooth gameplay. I know some guys are building their core i7 systems in preparation of the release of SoW, among other sims. I'd hate to read of how SoW just brings the latest and the greatest to it's knees. But I guess they won't have to turn down quite so many settings as less-than-topnotch gaming rigs might. Good thing Oleg is making it scalable. ;) I'd much rather spend my cpu cycles on complex weather, and clouds and stuff. A good sim is hard on a good cpu. Ain't it?
Well. can't worry about every thing.
Flyby out

The thing about physX so far is that it kills frame rates unless you have either a high end gpu or running sli. For the time being I like ATI's direction and planning on using Havok, which is cpu bound but in the future either one may prove to be superior or someone else can come out with something better. We'll see.

Glad you agree with me flyby. i7 or not, for me at least, the vehicle detail is getting turned down to say medium though I'd be willing to bet a good 775 quad should run this mostly fine. I do have hope and faith in Oleg that he won't produce a flight sim crysis, but get the code in order for better game play.

Since I am on the topic of the sim scaleablity (sp?) I do want to ask Oleg something for the next update whenever that is. Sorry if they are asked before.

1. How many options in the option menu are we going to get in order to make it not only playable but have at least some kind of improved graphics? ex: aircraft detail, cloud detail, terrain, vehicle, wind, so on and so on.

2. How many levels are there going to be for each specific option? ie...low, middle, high, ultra (PC killing)

3. Can the next round of pics show level of detail when choosing low, medium and high option?

Flyingbullseye

+1...ya, was about to mirror your comments. SOW is likely to be so GPU dependent that most people will not be able to spare the "HP" to run the physics program....

I'm not so sure SOW would be so gpu dependent. Traditionally flight sims are cpu bound but this could change things. Mum seems to be the word on this. Though reading all the details that Oleg plans on putting in this sim I go between figuring we may need a govt super computer just to get playable frame rates to figuring certain aspects like the radar grid could be implimented on a simple basic way. But alas, frickin mum!:-P

Flyingbullseye

Did someone else already asked for this but it would be great to be able to "duck" while performing head-on attack :)

The time between updates is getting longer. a promised (that can be debated) website fails to arrive two months after slated.
Now while working on a Sim may be time consuming, delegating someone to post an odd update cannot be that hard surely? Even the silence from Project Gaba is worrying.
That last time we had any real movement on this forum was over the confusion about Birds of Prey.
Now in an economic depress, wobbly or shacky feedback is one of the first signs of trouble.
Now it has been reported that SOW has slipped because of incompatablities with directX 11 and the OpenGL 3? Is this true?

Gossip.

DX and OGL are always incompatible, as they are different rendering techniques, one provided by Microsoft, the other at least based upon open-source. There have been rumours about Vista and issues with OGL, though, but apparently they turned out to be gossip, too.

To the website thing:
It is not the question if Oleg has the time or balls to command somebody from his staff to produce a website. The question is: Does the distributor (UBISOFT) allow Oleg to announce the titel to the public before UBISOFT does itself. Oleg's team is not responsible, most likely not even allowed to present a website of their product, as it is in terms of legal contracts, not his project alone. Ubisoft gives the money, so they say what is done and what not. People tend to forget, how business works - maybe it's the forum color...

Same is for Project Galba. The news is posted there for such a long time, but nobody seems to read what is posted there: "As the project has not yet been officially announced, we cannot provide regular updates."

So, if you guys don't get that new car you are wanting so much or preordered, you go to the factory and demand a statement from the production-line-supervisor? I honestly doubt that.

That Oleg gives you news via this forum is a bonus for his community, not a natural thing or something to demand. Go to the UBI-forums, ask their hotlines or write emails to their support-crew, if you want to change the publicity-campaign for the game!

[QUOTE=Feuerfalke;66435]Gossip.

DX and OGL are always incompatible, as they are different rendering techniques, one provided by Microsoft, the other at least based upon open-source. There have been rumours about Vista and issues with OGL, though, but apparently they turned out to be gossip, too.
QUOTE]

You are back, I missed you :)
Was just showing the little ones how to stir-up controversy on the thread and get a response :grin:
And yes i know Oleg will respond when he is ready, ps he announced the dedicated website not ubizoo so i am guessing it is either a 1c or Maddox games site?
I thing ubizoo are just publishers

That's what most people use this forum for. No need to show anybody. ;)

And usually those who cause a stir-up are the ones that shoulder-pat when Oleg posts some news, because they think it was entirely because of their post. Well, you know the story - it repeats all two olegian weeks.

"Just the publisher" is something Oleg will probably write down on his t-shirt, once BoB is released.

That the website will not released with the UBIFORUMs is not surprising, but it does not mean, that the website has nothing to do with UBISOFT. It just means that SoW:BoB will not replace the IL2-Forum on UBI and it will also not walk the path that PacificFighters went, when it was released: To just add a subforum and a linked site-clone to the main IL2-Site.

SoW is a different brand, a different engine and a different game and it's pretty obvious especially the publisher wants to show that. On the other hand, UBI is only the publisher for the western markets, so it may as well be a sort of joint venture or a 1C site.

That doesn't change the fact, though, that it is not up to Oleg alone. ;)

I know, pats back

Why are you still convinced that Ubisoft are the publishers? Ubisoft flatly deny that they are.

Actually, I'd bet granny's drawers SoW will be more cpu-dependent rather so than the GPU. PhysX actually works by taking some of that computational work off the cpu and sending it to the GPU. In an SLi format, once card could actually take on that extra bit of workload. Articles on PhysX claim that's oow it works, and does so because the GPU supposedly has more computational power
http://www.blachford.info/computer/articles/PhysX1.html

A nice OCP forum discussion here: http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1336975

I'm hopeful that a powerful GPU with over 512mb of memory will be sufficient for SoW; something like a 4870-1gb card, or even a GTX 260-12 should nearly dominate SoW. But the cpu...well that's another matter, especially with all those ground objects milling about. I'm only hopeful we can turn them down or off.
Flyby out

If the code will be what it should be any 4core cpu will have to be sufficient. If not, well, back to raw power race.

We will see...I just hope that everybody's GPU is powerful enough to take the performance hit. Some of the "tests" in that article showed a substantial FPS (drop) hit when the physics was processed on the GPU. It looked like the only cards that could handle it where the "above 8000" series Nnvidia cards (don't know the ATI equivalent_lol).

Attacking from the Sun
 

Oleg, I did a search for this topic on this thread, and found nothing. Sorry if I double post the same topic.

One aspect of WWII combat that I hope SoW will model better than IL2 is the effect of attacking out of the sun. I have been doing a lot of reading as I am sure your team has and it is a recurring theme that pilots hated to have the sun at their back unless they were attacking with it behind them. Will this be a larger factor in game play in SoW? in IL-2, i feel little threat from enemies coming at me undetected from the sun.

pHYSeX...WHAT ?
 

What is the point of Physx. If the GPU is directed to procress more data, what is the point? After all we already have multi core CPUs, many of which are available to process more carnage. THe cost of an additonal core on the CPU is a mere fraction of that of an additional GPU core.

It seems rather daft to use PHYSCOTIX to market vidcards, and further absolutly dumbfounding to imply that we might need a second GPU to process PHYCHE-x computaions. Use a CPU core.

I smells more of the SLI marketing BS. SLI never made sence and still does not, so now instead of needing a second vidcard for SLI now we need one for FUSSUX?

SLI fizzled, never delivered, never was remotely cost effective. Although they spent loads of $$ on hype and marketing which would have been better invested for the consumers in ditching the thoughtless stock cooling for more simple, cheaper, quieter, and tons more effective cooling like Artic Cooling Accelero coolers.

Please research before you buy the hype. I hear rumblings they will be marketing a third videocard dedicated to keeping your coffee and dognuts warm whilst flying and fragging. Oh say it ain't so.

FLYBYE - you soon will need a third job to build the future!

You're right and a little off Spud. The problem with physiX is just what you mentioned, that you need a second gpu or watch your fps drop like a rock. Hence the other alternative, havoc which is cpu bound and doesn't have the fps hit as long as you have at least a dual core.

However SLI now with the i7 chips is starting to stretch its legs as the drivers have been coded for multi core cpus, prior to i7 you'd have a decent argument but it still shows an improvement, however small or great it was, when the game is coded to take advantage of it. Xfire has yet to do that but could also show similar results if or when implimented for multi core chips. The biggest problem with the graphics cards is the drivers, both companies need to really really focus on releasing an excellent driver before they go on to creating a new card but there's no money in the drivers soooo you get the picture.

Flyingbullseye

I imagine PhysX and ATi's equivalent could be worthwhile computational aides one day. But don't get the idea that I ever bought into SLi or Crossfire. I'm a fan of neither. Give me one solid-performing GPU and I'm happy.
It's one thing to try to keep up with some interesting concepts (like Hydra). But the reality is really all about what software codes gaming programmers are willing to use. So far only one or two games support PhysX. The best thing about it is that PhysX is now a software implementation for Nvidia, through it's drivers.
Imagine the day when Oleg releases recommended requirements. Better get your orders in for a Cray right about now. ;)
Flyby out

lcd'S
 

Before everone starts kissing each others bum over Fishysicks, as long as you process min 60 FPS, your LCD will never show the effects of higher FPS.

Above that point it is just a meaningless number on your LCD screen.

1c become the best out there
 

i hope to have more than hit "I" to start motor in storm of war

I also hope for a "full real" CEM with different workloads for different planes!
NO BALANCING THERE !

Add-on Planes
 

Hallo to all,
i'm new for this interesting forum.
I have a question : I have two installations of Sturmovik 1946, the first
modded with UI v1.1 the second with ultra@pach, i wish, if is possible
add into UI tree missing planes: Cantz 1007, Hs-123 and PZL-24.
That is possible and if what is the correct method?
Sorry for my bad english and thanks in advanced for any further
informations about.
Regards.

Not the question for this forum, better google AAA Il-2 mods and go to that forum (where you got the UI in the first place).

Cough, rise of flight are already showing video's of clouds, planes flying etc.
Now correct me if i am wrong, they were going to use the IL2 engine and they then developed their own engine instead?
So, lets see, they have ingame screenshots, they have ingame movies and we are still looking at development still... I am starting to understand why they went with their own engine rather than wait for SOW...
SOW will have to be almost photo realistic to beat what they have done. Looking at their current clouds demo video I have to say well done.
Now for the love of Oleg, please give us something to brag about!
Patiently waiting...

The cloud issue
 

Hmmm, for what I understand, NeoqB people are not done yet: the AI is still able to see across clouds....

This is a very difficult problem to solve, because the software needs to be able to compute if an A/C coming into the AI detection bubble (or something to that effect: it is not possible to calculate a detection probability for every A/C in the environment; I suppose you have to set a limit arbitrarily at a certain distance, say 10 km) can be seen or not...
For this to work with a cloud, the cloud should logically exists as a bona-fide 3D object (and possibly an associated "detection box") , not a sprite or pseudo 3D object.
To simulate a human pilot reaction, one may possibly compute a detection "event" taking in account, alongside the straight line between the pilot eye and the A/C to detect:

- Pilot quality (rookie - ace) -> a first coefficient between 0 and 1
- Pilot fatique -> again a coefficient between 0 and 1
- cockpit geometry (taking in account structural members) -> 0 or 1
- A/C geometry (parts like wing or cowling, dead angles) -> 0 or 1
- atmospheric transparency (there is a difference between CAVOK in Arctica and summer haze in Tuscany) -> another coefficient between 0 and 1, also depending of distance between the two A/C and atmosphere model (inversion layer level is crucial here); if you or your opponent are in the cloud, it becomes 0.
- difference in height (depending of respective atmosphere layers, and also camouflage quality) -> another coefficient between 0 and 1 (maybe a discret set of values here)
- cloud part presence along the line of sight
- respective flying direction (a fleeing fighter as seen from the observation point is more difficult to spot than a parallelly flying bomber)

All this will give you after computation a value either of 0 or someting between 0 and 1 at a time t0 (entrance of the A/C in the detection bubble); logically this computation will be done X times/s should be combined to the time interval between computations (as long as the A/C is in the detection bubble):

The addition of the "time interval X the computed detection coefficient" over the time since the A/C has penetrated the detection bubble or since the coefficient have changed from a 0 value for a "certain" time ("I believe I have seen someting, but I cannot see it anymore...") represents the probability of detection; when this number goes over a certain value, and never goes back to 0 for longer than two or three intervals "detection is acquired"...

I believe this would emulate quite well the way a real pilot would act...and I suspect it may be difficult to fully implement in a sim due to calculation power constraints (but with multicore CPU, who knows?)...So this can be simplified by just integrating the pilot/cockpit characteristics as a detection probability factor, the existence or not of a part of cloud in the line of sight direction, the dead angles and the real distance between the A/C (not 300 m like in IL2, even in the dead angles)

I just hope I did not lose anybody here...

Amically,

JVM

PS: the RoF clouds as seen from above or from aside are beautiful, very much real-life, but the cloud bases are still not very realistic (they should mostly be "fuzzily flat")...

Gennadich/neoqb are still developing.

http://www.youtube.com/user/neoqb

SOW will have AI unable to see through clouds

and the AI gunners as well I hope?

Technically ROF have stated that the clouds are objects in their latest blogs if I am correct. So AI should view them the same as say a hill etc...
I am in know way suggesting ROF is near completion, but it is a lot further along it would seem than SOW in some aspects.

Hi all, my first post here.

Sorry in case I repeat an existent concept, I am not too god with new stuff...

Anyway: no need to say I am craving this game, and I really hope there will be an expansion pack or similar stuff to give us jets on this new engine

I love the "1946" experimental planes in Sturmovik, so I hope we will see them back again in BOB with new stunning physics and graphics

I guess the editor will be amazing, and (my personal dream) a movies tool (edit, cut, publish as AVI) would literally kill me

That's it, I apologize and will intensively use the "search" button from now on

ciao!
ConteZero
Italy

The ROF developers have stated that the AI will be able to see thru the clouds but they hope to address that situation in the future.

The ROF development is ahead of the SOW development by probably more than a few months. ROF may be released before the summer, but we all know how those things go. I'm looking forward to flying ROF for a few months before SOW comes out. It will help pass the time. OFF3 is OK but it doesn't like my MSFF2 joystick and turns it into a wet noodle.

I’m not sure if anyone has raised this point, but, given were going to get a dynamic weather system in BoB, this will lead to the possibility that winds will change during the course of a mission.

How will the information about wind directions and speeds be related to us so we can takeoff land on the correct runways (taking cross wind components etc) at our destination. Will we be able to call up the tower or will we have to over fly the airfield and keep and eye out for the wind sock?

Hopefully there will be a more accurate representation of traffic control. Hmmm! Being red green colour blind I hope they don’t use flares to wave us off!

Will this info be given to us in our pre-flight briefings so we can use it to plan our routes?

Nice question, pity we have seen nothing that indicates SOW is anywhere near this point in production. Air traffic control will I am sure be modeled and I am sure windsocks will be fluttering on fields as well.

Can we have an ETA on the SOW website please Oleg or will it be another case of hopefully some time this year?