Rise of Flight has a new damage model pics on their blog ( yes they have a site and a blog... imagine that)

looking good !

They give regular info and video. That my friends is such a great idea it should be included in the Biz Marketing 101 class.

Rise of Flight is also schedualed to be released much sooner than SOW hence to the new website and info...imagine that. ROF should compliment SOW and give us something to fly until SOW is released.

I must have missed it when is SOW BOB schedualed to be released?

4th quarter next year. It's not firm because as we all know there can be delays, but that's the latest estimate from Oleg.

Salute

With all due respect to RISE OF FLIGHT, I don't think it is going to be in the same league as STORM OF WAR, BATTLE OF BRITAIN.

I think its great to see regular updates from the ROF developers, and I look forward to buying and playing their game, but I don't think we should tell Oleg how to run his updates, based on what a totally unproven developer is doing with theirs.

1C Maddox is not in a race with ROF. Oleg has the track record that tells us he delivers, and for most of us, that is enough. If you doubt he is going to deliver, think where this community came from.

Oleg is a perfectionist, he works on the aspects of his games till they are right.

He has already told us his expected date of publication, (Fall '09) and we have seen a lot of material from him. Each new update increases our knowledge of the game a bit more.

That's all we can expect.

[QUOTE=*Buzzsaw*;57303]....
Oleg is a perfectionist, he works on the aspects of his games till they are right.
....QUOTE]

what a load... if he were a perfectionist he would have not bungled the fm of some Allied planes...

[QUOTE=ramstein;57308]You are correct, he made some mistakes in aspects of the FM's. I have mentioned more than a few issues. I and others had to put up a very long series of posts to him before he for example, corrected the roll rate of the P-47.

Those issues were most often corrected. The only real issues in IL-2 are a LACK of aircraft, not so much the modelling of the existing ones. For example, I would have liked to see a +11 Tempest modelled, instead of only the +9 early model we got. But I can't complain about how the +9 version performs, it is very accurate to the tests I've seen of a +9 boost Tempest.

By perfectionist, I mean in the technical aspects of the game. Ie. how well it handles huge aircraft formations without lag, how state of the art the graphics are, how the overall physics of flight are handled, etc. etc. If the past is any indication, I think those aspects will be as good as they can be.

The Flight models of individual aircraft can quite easily be corrected. Oleg has shown he is willing to do that. I am more interested in the overall functionality and visual appeal of the game. If those details are correct, the smaller pieces will fall into place.

Thanx for not jumping back at me, I kinda came back a bit harsh..
when I said 'what a load' ....

sorry..

I just get emotional on some of the missed opportunities and BS that happened with IL-2 over the years..

what could have been kinda thing..

[QUOTE=*Buzzsaw*;57309]

[QUOTE=ramstein;57308]You make these sweeping statements here and other places Ramstein, but other than saying the FM's are this or that I dont see any specific errors pointed out by you.

So here is your chance lets see some specifics of these so called "Bungled FMs" from you. like Vmax versus altitude, Time to heights, Sustained Turn rates, Roll rates etc. Of course the source data you are using to make these claims would be handy to.

[QUOTE=ramstein;57308]Lets be fair...both Allied and Axis aircraft have FM issues here and there. Given the incredible stable of aircraft that we have available to us in IL-2 1946 its not surprising.