What really is needed is a manual how to calculate and compensate the wind-drift with the Bomb sight

In this aspect I also hope it's better. However, we may differ about what better is.
During the bomb run, some autopilot features were engaged and the plane control was then transferred to the bombardier. I believe IL2 got a nice compromise representing this aspect (for more info, one may wanna read the bombardier information bulletins of the period - also, IIRC, that 1990 movie "Menphis Belle" depicts the routine).

Even our old IL2 isn't very far from that. I believe what could meet these expectations is more flexibility. That said, my better would be a more customizable difficult settings engine.

Some of the planes had IAS/TAS, in others the bombardier had to calculate them. If the engine allows the player to set the difficult to accommodate his current level of proficiency, more people will be happy. There are many pilots that aren't happy anymore with the bombing from the no_cockpit_view (ww), where one has TAS and above ground altitude, but aren't quite up to the task of full switch level bombing (navigating, calculating, course correction and etc...)

The big advantage I see in having it integrated in the engine is using the same variables (formulas and tables) of the simulated world as there is no guarantee that the external software will do its number crunching using the same values. An in game E6B of the time (or country equivalent) would interest the hardcore player.

Completely agree. Whenever I have the opportunity to talk to those pilots I ask if they would like to learn how to level bomb. Because, as I see, there is no need to figure out the bombsight alone, many competent players have worked and reworked the knowledge already. One needs simply to read the material produced. If someone isn't willing to invest a small fraction of time to learn that skill, I assume it's not that desirable. Authors have invested far more time researching and producing the material than it's necessary to actually read and understand it - pro bono.

Romanator, with his offer, and T}{OR, with his material widely available, are good examples of how accessible this knowledge is.
I agree with your premise, but, the more players a game have, the more profit (and longer life) it will have. In that sense, I tend to lean towards customization. Let the players adjust the level of difficult to their tastes.
As for the realism card, I personally know a few guys that defend it to the last drop. They can point out the flaws of a modeled cockpit that failed to use the right color shade or have an incorrect throttle lever, all in the name of realism, but, when flying, they prefer the arcade view. I tend to take with a grain of salt those discussions. In my opinion developers are quite capable and wouldn't invest time and money adjusting grass shade and outfits in detriment of more important stuff. I don't even worry about it.
I second that. I'm particularly curious if the bombsight will have a bubble adjustment. Not having that, as in IL2, will induce an even big deviation as CoD has moving air masses. However, I'm not sure if developers are still reading... specially this long post :-)


EDIT:That info coming from designers would be really valuable, because depending on how the engine treats bomb drag and air mass movement, it may slightly alter the necessary adjustments from what was done in reality - (rendering RL literature/knowledge we acquired useless)

té mais
tityus

+10. Bombers pilots will love to see it!

Agreed!

Good post.

It is calculated in bombsight

Oh, i am aware of that, the problem i wanted to adress is: how to get the numbers to put into the bombsight to compensate for the wind-drift.
In the B-17 there was a instrument where the bombardier (or was it the navigator?) could watch the ground passing and by adjusting some lines could determine the direction and strength of the wind in his altitude.

I keep my fingers crossed that they don't subscribe to such all out "black or white" logic and do something that lets us both do what we want. After all it's better both for the community and sales to keep as much people as possible reasonably happy, than have half the people be absolutely ecstatic and the other half very disappointed ;)

What i'd like to see in the future is some kind of support for an AI scripting tool. Flying with other humans as crew would be awesome, but flying in single player wouldn't have to feel like an empty aircraft anymore if the AI could be programmed to call out bandits or the bomb aimers and navigators could provide steering instructions to the pilot.

What you refer to as an AI monster is simply a way to substitute the lack of a human crew in a multi-seat aircraft, which was complex enough to require more than one person to handle it. By all means, don't use such a feature if you don't like it, i'm not here to tell you how to enjoy your gaming. I just don't like blanket statements and prefer having options for everyone ;)

thanks for the replies (+ve and -ve) - my point is, I'd like to see something about how level bombing will be done in CoD and, no, I don't intend to sit in the bombardier's position the whole time. :)

sure level stabilizer works to a point but it is very cumbersome and difficult to use. Have you tried to line up the bombsight on a target using level stabilizer?

yep, quite easy with the lotfe.
Level stabilisator and rudder trim, works like a charm.

Yes, that's how it's done. :)

You climb out, input your altitude (AGL) and speed (true), and increase the bombsight angle so that it faces forward. Head to the target, engage the stabilizer, and then make minor adjustment with rudder trim. Engage the bombsight, make more adjustments, and watch your eggs land in the pickle barrel :)

The stabilizer is cumbersome, but you need to do some planning first, and give yourself some time before coming over the target. It should be easy then.

Check out this vid (not mine), and many others in the related section:

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