I turn the clouds off in IL*2 because the AI shoot me through them. If the AI can't see me through the clouds in SoW, I will be able to turn the clouds on, which means they will be 100% better than the clouds in IL*2, no matter what they look like.

could have been lots of ways, plane was coming from left corner and tried to avoid hitting the trees , applying to much rudder and accidental to much aileron which made the wing tip hit the ground and break off and the hurricane came spinning to a halt, just a scenario, cant tell from the picture so I guess it's useless to keep speculating, however it is quite fun:)

yes that the first thing i thought as well...

Just to add, the bug-pure and simply-appears to be grass completely oblivious (in theory) to light and reflections, and also to objects (as it surfaces through the Hurricane). ;)

Excellent update, the game looks drop-dead gorgeous.

If someone says that wings of prey looks better I will make sure that they require plastic surgery when ive finished with them :rolleyes:

Fixed for 4.10 according to some older updates from Team Daidalos.

Hello "new" member. Good to see you have been following the obsessions of a few "old" members so closely.

Oleg informed us long ago that weather dynamics would not be revealed until closer to release. With that in mind, we haven't yet seen all that SoW has to offer in regards to clouds and weather.

Rain puddles on the runway, snow drifts at the hanger door...we shall see:grin:

The Hurricane in that first pic is sweet...it looks like its black an red to me, awesome paintjob haha

if you can understand the Russian language, you might be interested:


Oleg Maddox interview

http://gameguru.ru/articles/961/view.html

Are all the in game movies shown in this interview really from SOW ? :confused:
Just wondering...:rolleyes:

Salute !

No, they also put some wings of prey footage in there :confused:
And some of the footage is from a verry old version of SOW.

short abstracts:

1:58 - there will be approximately 30 planes

2:06 - controllable by player more then 10

2:39 - map size: 300x400 kilometers


3:45 - campaign and its story is based on some book. Unfortunately, Oleg didn`t say the name of the book

Thanks IFnXI! Feel free to translate more :)

no, its not :) some from Birds of pray, some from 3D render, some from Il-2: Battle of Britain :)

There is no one from actual Igromir version build. The took different materiasl from different time and different games.

It was innacurate taxing with the turn left, not the landing.

Oleg you are very rested now, come hang out for a couple of hours:grin:
I like very much the jagged torn fabric metal in that shot.

I love the new fire effects Oleg, great work.:grin:

Nice! So the left landing gear collapsed first and the left wing separated as the weight of the plane landed on it?

Didn't get your point... The only thing I am "following closely" is WIP presentation here and on youtube.

Anyway, many thanks to people who explained... should be - the last minute interpolation of "meteorology".

Interesting. So would that mean we shouldn't expect a dynamic campaign but instead scripted missions based on this book?


Great update as usual. As others have said, the Hurricane in the grass shot looks great!
________
VAPORIZERS INFO

correct. 4:13.

P.S.In my opinion dynamic campaigns much more boring than static campaigns. If it made talented in static campaigns you can read stoty, and at same time learn history, as opposed to dynamic campaigns, generated by computer.

Last time I asked Oleg he said there would not be a 'scripted' campaign (following day-by-day historic events), just a dynamic one.

http://gameguru.ru/articles/961/view.html

4:13

Even so, the clouds are the best we have seen yet (in the footage that look like it is from SoW).

In the interests of accuracy, shouldn't the crashed Hurricane pilot be slapping his forehead with a speech bubble saying 'DOH!' ?

Just a quick question- that grass is very long, and in a earlier shot i saw a hurricane wrecked in a corn field. Is the grass treated as an object or merely an aesthetic element?
For example, landing or taxiing into grass increases the chances of tipping over?

If these are from SoW, then niiice!!

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y12...tback/sc01.jpg

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y12...tback/sc02.jpg

They aren't; it's a CGI movie which for whatever reason is labelled "Storm of War beta" in youtube, but has nothing to do with it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmlk99ENutw

I thought that everybody should know about this meanwhile...

I seriously doubt that.


Exactly what I remember him saying too. So if it turns out to be based after a book, I believe it will have some static elements - but won't be static at all.


As for the update - I love the first two (Photoshoped probably) images. :cool:

S!

Can not be fully dynamic if you can not win BoB as Luftwaffe. And I recall Oleg saying LW can not win BoB in SoW..so static, semi-static or what?

How about "dynamic where it counts, historical where it needs to be"? ;)

Seriously, you - as a pilot, even if you're commanding a Geschwader - do not have the means to influence the conduct of operations in such a way that Germany would have a (slim theoretical) chance to win. To do that you'd need to be at least Kesselring or Sperrle, both of which are Field Marshals and aren't flying. So what's it going to be: A strategy campaign for a strategy game or a flight sim campaign for a flight simulation?

Great shot of the Hurri, Oleg! Compliments to the dev team!

@csThor: well said.

Keep going after the airfields and ignore London. Keep to the original plan and it will work!

I`ll try to translate word by word this sentence about dynamic campaign:

"...Нету динамической кампании, как таковой, которую любят аркадные игроки очень, хотя в последних аркадах я их вообще не вижу, там просто маленький набор миссий и все."

"...we don`t have dynamic campaign, as such, wich arcade players likes very much, although in recent arcades I don`t see one in general, there is just small set of missions and that's all"

May be I missed something in context, but as I understand there is fully static campaign. About dynamic campain - only that words wich I translated.

P.S. I guess, it could be better, if Oleg clarify a question with one's own hand.

You're right, this sounds like it was pulled out of the context. If it turns out to be true, which again I somehow doubt, it would go against everything Oleg has said so far.

As others have said - Oleg already stated on more than one occasion that you won't be able to win as LW. Based on your latest input - the only logical conclusion I can make is that we might get somewhat "scripted" campaign (based on that book) with dynamic missions. Based on that book.

Can you translate more of the interview for us please?

After some more thought - has Oleg ever confirmed (talked about) the dynamical campaign in the BoB??

Unfortunately, full translation takes to much time. So I can translate only short abstracts of interview.

S!

csThor..I know what you mean. But we know a LOT more than Lufties or Raffites at the time. And BoB started strategically earlier, in France already. I am sure everyone has read their history ;)

Say a player is Geschwader Kommodore of SKG210 and destroys the Home Chain and/or other radar towers succesfully, opening a path for the bombers. How can RAF then direct full force on attacking bombers? And if all the frontline fields are bombed useless LW would have air superiority over southern England etc. Of course a VERY simplified example, but you get the pic ;)

Falcon 4.0 and Falcon 4.0:Allied Force has the dynamic campaign that has not been surpassed by any sim yet. Rowan's BoB II has one too yet it has limitations on LW side as it was primarily aimed to be RAF side. Nevertheless dynamic. What SoW will have is to be seen, but high hopes that not a series of canned missions where previous outcome has no effect on next etc. Would be dull if you bombed a Sector comm center hampering Sector Command operations and in next mission all is good again..

SoW delivers a totally new experience after IL-2 in many areas, as seen on updates. Let's hope other areas are up to it as well. Content is a big part of ANY game. So fingers crossed and thumbs up SoW will become THE bench for the next decade and beyond.

I remember what turned out to be a very active debate in a poll over at the zoo. Oleg had asked Faustnik to do the poll, to find out what would be perfered dynamic campaign or etc.:grin:

So? Numerical superiority alone is not a guarantee to win a battle. Ask Dareios III at Gaugamela, ask Lucius Aemilius Paullus and Gaius Terentius Varro at Cannae, ask Marshal Bazaine at Mars-la-Tour. All of these enjoyed a convincing numerical superiority before the battle ... and still suffered a crushing defeat. Numerical superiority gives one side merely more options but they still have to employ them in a meaningful way.

First its Erprobungsgruppe 210 (http://foorum.mexxoft.com/images/smi...ruekte_008.gif) and my response would be "So?". You're still a subordinate to Luftflotte 2 and get your operation orders from there. So you don't have a say in what's your target and all you can do is fulfill the order as good as you can while keeping your men alive.

So we're back at the strategic decisions which are being made by people who aren't flying combat missions anymore. Besides the Luftwaffe did not have the insights we have today, the significance of the Radar stations was not understood and they were difficult to hit so after a while it seemed wasted effort to go after them. But again ... this is not on the layer a flight sim can and should depict, this is strategy.

I don't understand why people bring up Falcon 4 for a good campaign. Yes, it had a brilliant engine with a lot of dynamics but it utterly failed to create immersion for me. Maybe I'm too old-school but I happen to severely dislike switching units and flights, free choosing of missions, entering cockpits while already airborne and a general lack of anything that makes me believe I am a small pilot in a great conflict. In that respect, meaning making me believe I am part of a living and breathing world, I still rate Red Baron II as the very best campaign I ever played.

S!

SoW will be at level of a squadron then, understandable. In Rowan's game you can play as a strategic game too, thus change outcome of the BoB. Even in SWOTL you could ;)

I merely gave a simplified example that IF the 210, for example, had been successfull then the bombers would have a bit more time before being intercepted. That is a lot in terms of warfare. Damage is done already if the attacking force is egressing.

Why Falcon 4.0? Because it has a dynamic campaign, plain and simple. Everything around you went on even you would just sit and watch the map. You were a mere asset in the war. That is what still makes F 4.0 great.

What would be a let down in SoW is that it would be a scripted series of missions with an outcome written in stone regardless your actions. Just let the plane Autopilot all missions, what's the difference? Just a game with exceptional graphics but that's it. We've seen BoB before and would SoW be any different in that string? Been there, done that.

With extreme sarcasm..Was the wait of 6 years worth at all when all we get is fancy graphics and a set of features, but with no real content? Why fly for Luftwaffe at all when the only challenge would be not to die in the string of canned missions? That would offer zero replay value as the outcome is already known.

Above statement aside I believe SoW will offer a lot more and be the next sim to fly for years to come. Oleg and his team pulled this off with IL-2 so SoW will be no exception.

All of this is just too speculative. When Oleg is ready he tell tell us. Whatever the fact, we'll have the other 1n short order anyway. There will be mission builders building missions, and I won't be surprised to see a version of DCG for SOW eventually. We'll soon be inundated with every possible outcome of the battle........

That, in itself, is not a virtue but a part of it. Quite frankly if the devs fail to transport that stuff (= what we call immersion) then the effort, while laudable, is a failed effort. And Falcon 4 was a failed effort in my opinion as it was as interesting as watching paint dry.

Here we disagree. I very much consider the idea that flying alone (and the performance of a single pilot to boot) could influence a confrontation such as the BoB is ludicrous to the umpteenth degree.
What I want for the campaign is accuracy in the details ... meaning for example that an Oberstleutnant (such as "Vati" Mölders) had authority over his Geschwader but he had no say in the general conduct of the battle. Various ranks have various layers of responsibility (my phrase) and I'd like to see that represented ... I want, to make a long story short, a good representation of what the everyday life of a pilot was like back then ... and not some gamey "let's ignore that Göring and Hitler are idiots and win the BoB with our knowledge and hindsight". :roll:

^^
This,

pretty much sums up my way of thinking as well. I do hope all you said here makes it into SoW. Having control of your own squadron and not taking part in overall war changing decisions sound just right to me if BoB is to be focused on historical accuracy.

Also, last time I heard this is a plane simulator and not a strategic game. ;)

With all due respect, Foo'bar, it is not that obvious since we all know that Oleg still have plenty of features that we have'nt seen yet...And when you watch an official interview with Oleg, we assume ( :rolleyes: ) that what is shown is from SOW. Someone unfamilliar with SOW's development could have been mislead....

And let me take this occasion to congratulate you personnally for your impressive contribution to SOW ! :grin:

Salute !

S!

Maybe Falcon 4.0 soon turns real, seems the northern guys are bullying around. We flew Falcon 4.0 online as co-op, started from the cockpit with pre-flights and all. That added a LOT to the immersion. Falcon still has stood the test of time, not even the DCS series have gotten even close to it as they lack the dynamic campaign. But sure do have the fidelity in systems etc. now, especially with A10C coming.

As said, we do not know what SoW will be except you can not win as Luftwaffe pilot. Fair enough IF everything else is done exceptionally well. Fancy graphics and fidelity do not mean a squat to me if the rest is poop or done halfarsed. But this is not the case with Oleg I think ;) He has put a lot of time to this and I am eagerly waiting for SoW, even some of my writings might be cynical or sarcastic.

Could this campaign engine be built with a multi-cpu desktop computer.

Say using months July, August, and September.

Input known time, day, altitude, target, for each mission for both sides.

Let the AI play out the battle with the limited input of the player or players.

A damage model that stays damaged for the approximate time of repair.

If some parts of the chain home command were damaged then some flights would not be vectored to the right location making interception a matter of guess and luck.

Some flights would not take off due to damaged airfields, although the large open fields used by the RAF would be almost impossible to completely disable for any period of time.

Off-line the player would be able to stop, fast forward, etc the campaign.

The addition of military ground transport, train routes, etc would add alot of burden, but in this day of multiple CPUs it may be possible.

It should be possible for a mulitcpu computer to just keep track of the grid locations of moving aircraft and vehicles that are not in visual contact with the player.


I suppose keeping track of AI battles going on over different areas of a large map would be a nightmare of data, unless some formula was used for the outcome of air battles with no player involvement in the area.


I know this is awfully simplified, and when you get into the details it probably isn't possible at this time.

Edit.

While the campaign is going on around you, the option to select an airfield, number of aircraft in your flight, loadout, especially if you want to take a flight over the channel to France to look for targets of opportunity. Where there are triggers to launch interceptors if your spotted. The options could be almost limitless. Or missions like a lone Ju88, going deep into England, to attack a Damn site. Doing these missions with the knowledge that there is a full on war going on around you can be very immersive, not knowing what you will encounter.

Chivas..That sounds cool...I wish one of the up-dates would go into detail about the heart and soul of the game. It would be a nice break from the weekly screen shots.:grin:

Greetings.

Well I see it more like Flanker35M here.
Falcon4 was a total dynamic strategy game with 3D build on top of it.
That was very impressiv! You just have to like US jets though :)
I loved it.

As for BoB.
I strongly hope to see more then just srcripted events that I have to play with!
Sperrle, Mölders or Pohl doesent matter :confused: The combination of a complex strategic, dynamic developement (in real time, as it was in F4) based on user input (your missions flow by yourself) is the kick.

Atleast, I'd like the idea to be able to chose my targets, like Flanker35M pointed out. It would be easy to get the home chain at the canal with stukas/JU88 at night and so on.....

So, to make it worth the effort, what you do HAS TO MAKE AN IMPACT.

Or why else putting in any effort?

A scripted campaign based on historical missions was already in orginal IL2.
But as I see it, it wasnt one of its strong points.
Hopes are high to see something more convincing in Olegs Battle of Britain.


Cheers Dietger

Okay, your piont :) as someone who spends every day quite some time here in forum I can't believe that others don't do the same ;)

Thank you!

Keep in mind that all is connected...so whether you take out a spot light, radar, or command you will have an effect...at least, this is my understanding.:grin:

Oleg has said that the FMB design will be very similar to IL2, but with a few more toys to play with, I think the SoW campaign will be very similar to IL2's DCG.

But with the Battle Of Britain only lasting a few months the missions could be much more detailed.

One other thing, I was looking at a screen shot of the Beaufighter the other day and I don't think the first RAF squadron went operational with it until late 1940, and were not up to speed until Jan 1941....so prehaps Oleg is also covering the night air war into 1941 as well ?

( think there was a screen shot of He111 in night scheme? )


Does anyone remember any comments on night combat?

I didn't. Ok mostly because it was buggy as hell and only years of community work and a second commercial release finally managed to fix it (coincidentally, the same is true for Rowan's BoB ;)). But what people usually don't see (mainly because it sure gives a great and immersive environment to play around in) is that it's not very realistic. Still works ok for a ficitional setting, but creating such a system within the historical constraints of WW2 would be a nightmare. Just check how great this worked out for CFS3, where Germany and the UK would invade each other every few months...

Also consider that whatever campaign system SoW will come up with has to work with other theatres as well - the Battle of Britain is rather simple here because it lacks a ground war, front lines and tactical ground attack missions.

Again, for a flight sim the strategic level of Falcon4 is quite nice, but as a strategy game it's rather weak, and I personally don't want to be forced to play a not-so-great strategy game so I can play the flight sim beneath it.

Work on your kills score, help keep your squadron alive, or simply try to survive. Plenty of incentives without changing history :)

On the other hand it didn't keep it from being successful. While those other flight sim companies with dynamic campaign systems have all gone out of business...


Anyway, what Oleg has hinted at is a very open mission system that will hopefully provide options for 3rd party campaign systems. There were also hints for a customizable interface (I think HTML was mentioned in that context but it's been a while) so such campaigns could be integrated in a much better way than with Il2. And the missions themselves should be much more interesting with more trigger and scripting options. Although much of this is still rumours I have no doubt that we'll see some very complex (and dynamic) campaigns after release.

I guess this is dangerously close to going off-topic (if it isn't already) but while I agree that a single pilot almost certainly could not change the course of events to earn a German victory, in a truly dynamic campaign, who is to say that other ahistorical, though plausible, events don't transpire on a larger scale to change the outcome?

For the Luftwaffe, what if there's a greater occurence of missions to destroy the radar sites or an even greater emphasis on airfield attacks? I'm no BoB historian but my understanding is that at one point the RAF was hanging by a thread and it doesn't seem that implausible to me that it could be possible for someone to get a German victory, however unlikely, if the right missions are generated.

For the RAF, what if there are more wasteful missions generated that needlessly puts their air assets at risk and in turn aids the Germans in further diminishing their ranks? On the other hand, what if RAF air crews, by luck or other means, inflict much heavier losses on the Luftwaffe and the BoB is effectively over sooner than it was in reality?

The very nature of a purely dynamic campaign means that no one's experience is exactly the same. To me, a good compromise would be to have a series of scripted, purely historical single missions for each side and also offer a dynamic campaign where anything could theoretically happen. The only constant would be that both sides start with whatever airpower they had in the Summer of 1940. What happens after that is up to the campaign generator, pilot performance (AI and human), and luck.
________
Uggs

I am wondering that myself - is this too much OT? Please delete my post if so.


Exactly. When I play SoW I which to be a part of history, not change it to what might have happened. There are other games that do that. :)

I am all in for destroyed objects being destroyed in the next mission, plus some deviations of what happened (like prolonged attacks on airfields), but for a change in how the Battle ended - not my cup of tea.


As far as IL2's single player goes - I have never really been able to get into the mood there. Not even remotely like what for example EAW offered. It all felt too "synthetic". If I haven't discovered how good online game play was I would probably never given this game so much attention. Then again, I didn't try much of the custom built campaigns.

In any case, I do hope SoW will stand out here.

To Flanker35M
 

---
With all due respect to You Flanker but I think You made cardinal mistake comparing real history events SOW with totally fictional time frame Falcon game. In the past, dynamic campaign was all over my lips. I wanted to be in charge and see effects of my shooting. Thing is after a while I found Mission4today site and I started dwld some of Their stuff. One day I found myself in Hurri plus 3 against 20+ Heinkels with 12 Bf as a bodyguards. And You know what, I didn't have time ponder about what'll be tomorrow because I was hard at thinking (about 5 second) how to stop those bombers and SURVIVE. Flanker I'm sure You witnessed some forum wars about FM, lack of ashtray in Galland Bf and so on and on. We strive for realism in performances, looks, ballistics so why not in HISTORY. Our holly grail in this game should be to finish a game alive and if it is too easy for You turn off or on those buttons in realism and try to fly campaign from the day You bought the SOW.
That's my personal view on those things what You thinking ?

nynek

Has Oleg mentioned damage from debris, i was just playing ROF and a tail plane surface broke off and hit my engine destroying my prop :D .

Also will the shadow of the aircraft be real time i.e. if my aircraft has the tip of the wing or a aileron blown off will the shadow show the damage.

Kraken, F4 was a nightmare of bugs!
Still, it felt great to see all those things happen around you - air or ground!

>>>Work on your kills score, help keep your squadron alive, or simply try to survive. Plenty of incentives without changing history <<<

How can a mere flightsim player alter the course of history? ;)
No one will change history nor wants to do so.
Lets dont get overbord with this. The island will be sound and save ;)


A good researched historical campaign is a must , It will be a blast to "recreate" what once was. And "feel" after the events as they unfolded in our history.

No, winning or loosing isnt the point, at least not for me.
Its about user input - interaction with your playground.

For exaple, if you take out the radars, RAF shouldnt be able to direct the fighters for the interception , easy to understand and logic.
If you manage to destroy the German offensive capabilities - no bombing of, lets say, London! Thats the ways I want it to be "responsive-dynamic".
If, at the end of it, the screen tells you: Battle o. Britain over: RAF won. I have no objection with it.

I see it as a playground and I like it to be as interactive as possible, whats wrong with that?
Sure! you wont code this in a week or two. But its been a while now since developement started. And No, I dont like a dynamic but buggy campaign. I want one that works. Since the the battle was a mere air battle, relative simple (thats easy said I know) user input can be restricted to a relative smal number of things to play around/alter with. For the German side its mostly offensive decisions, the "user" can make or change. That means your targets! A very limited choise if you ask me nothing to complex.

That beeing said, I dont want to speculate too much either about it, until I see it.

Regards Dietger


Sorry Lads for beeing OT!

If you're English, your fighter can't hold enough ammo to make a significant impact on the German offensive. We're talking about days where hundreds of planes are being shot down in the course of an afternoon.

If you're German/Italian your fighter as well, can't hold enough ammo to make a difference or your bomber can't hold enough bombs or make enough sorties a day to do the same.

Look at Erich Hartmann! The guy shot down 352 aircraft on the Russian front. The Germans has ton's of 100+ aces, and they still lost the war. For every plane you shoot down, there is a an ace on the other side to do just the same. That's why you'll never see a difference.

I could see something along the lines of you being singled out by the enemy once your kill count has reached ~20 or so.

(enemy radio chatter) "There's that devil that took out Fritz/James yesterday! He's the one that's been swatting all our comrades/blokes out of the sky. Registration number 123. . . Swarm him!"

That could be sort of cool! Not something like, "The Italians have pulled out of the conflict after you downed 35 of their pasta-planes into the drink. Good show!" Or something equally unrealistic like, "The Fuhrer has ordered operation Sea Lion to go ahead. Your efforts have single-handedly resulted in the RAF being crippled as a fighting force!"

Is this a photoshopped image of the SoW model??

I mean to make it look like a painting, not altering the model itself.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...3&d=1290771550

I'd say it's a painting or a heavily retouched version of the 3D model. The 3D models look incredible... but not THAT incredible.

Ah, now you're talking. ;)

D'accord.

In principle I agree, but I also must second what speculum jockey said ... your potential for impact will be limited. It has to be there (i.e. an ace downed, a bridge destroyed etc) but it's a difficult thing to model as it's too easy to go overboard.

The thing about strictly historical thinking is that the fact that the events that occurred were not what was 'meant to be'. They were not written in stone as what had to happen. The events that transpired and decisions that were made, big and small, could have been different.

A dynamic campaign that can offer variability based on a different set of events and decisions seems pretty reasonable, in addition of course to more strictly historical campaigns. These events and decisions would largely be completely independent of the player's actions, although the player's actions would be part of the input, like successfully destroying radar stations or whatever.

For those of you with a more strictly historical mindset, what do you think about that? I'm kind of curious.

Speculum and csThor,

I think it was Rowans BoB? Which had both; a complete historical part and a part where the player could setup the overall strategies and targets of the side he played on.

I expect something a long that line.
I nice historical part, to resampling histo. events.
And, if we are lucky, a possibility to redirect and asign missions or targets for what ever flight 's about to take off: Bomber, recon , fighters whatsoever.
As Necrobaron speculated there is a lot room for possibilities.
There are enough opportunity for both sides to change directives.
Oleg early on said, it wont be possible to win the battle for axis side, so I think there are limitations in terms of user input?

Untill we actually see it - we patiently wait.

Dietger

If SOW can be adapted later to allow for:-

In campaign mode, You can play multiple rolls, from Air marshall directing/managing the campaign, pushing flags with numbers here and there, then clicking on a flag, to either join a squadron in flight, or at take off.

Once your flight is finished or you've been 'zapped', you put on your marshall cap and are back at the map - join another flight, move supplies, new recruits... you know that type of strategy thing. Here you will see the effects of your decisions/actions on a greater scale.

Doing the Air Marshall thing can make a great online campaign in mutliplayer, where you can form a military structures through which you can advance.
Endless options => Title: Air Marshal-SOW ( Remember I mentioned the title first :) )

Maybe Oleg would like me to develop this... nudge nudge!! :)
:grin:

This is exactly what I don't want. It is against my idea of what a flight simulation campaign must be like. Strategic decisions (which you have to take in BoB) are the prerogative of generals which - and yes, I know I am repeating myself - do not fly combat missions.

A flight sim cannot depict the layer above the regimental plane (= Geschwader or Wing). As such any flight sim campaign that tries to mingle these two very different things is a gamey crutch and I can't stand such things. There is a lot to be done when the layers of responsibility are accurately depicted (management of aircrew, tactical planning of how to fulfill the task/mission which one's assigned by the Fliegerkorps / Luftflotte / Group Command etc). What you propose is a strategy campaign that is about as immersive to me as a blank sheet of paper. :rolleyes:

So what I wish for? Let's take Flanker's example of Erprobungsgruppe 210 and assume the player chose the rank of Hauptmann/Major and is in command of said unit. The player receives a mission target (or a group of targets) such as a bunch of CH and CHL stations in the Dover area. He receives a timeframe during which the attack has to take place (which is interwoven with the other ops of Luftflotte 2 that day) and in this case he has to plan how to employ his three Staffeln to take out the target(s) without suffering too many losses. For the briefing I see something along these lines:

"Einsatzbefehl - 13 August 1940

To: Erprobungsgruppe 210
From: Stab Luftflotte 2

You are tasked to conduct a strike against the british radar stations at Dover and Rye (map with marked target locations). The attack has to be conducted between 7:45 a.m. and 8:05 a.m. in order to reduce interceptions against our bomber forces which will cross the french coast at 8:10 a.m."

Then comes something about weather conditions, recon information, target photos and intelligence (i.e. known allocation of enemy fighter forces, enemy AAA positions etc), the aircraft pool and pilots available for that mission. Then it's up to you - you can either auto-plan the mission or do it manually.

So you can plan something but it's within believable and reasonable limits.

Nicely put, that sounds about right. It is on the lines that would be ideal for me. Some actions / attacks happening like they were planned, but not having big enough impact on the Battle outcome. Making out actions and input count for something.

On the other hand - total reenactment of the Battle with every single plane downed as it was would also be boring and impossible to do. :)

Yes, we can see some jaggies from aliasing on the nose windows frames.

Oleg, do you say at 4.43 AI is so strong/complex it eats up all 8 cores if you have them? Do you mean AI uses like 80-100% of i7 processors such as you used at Igromir?

For example this is the case with complex AI in Arma2 that makes my 4 cores(HT disabled) of i7 860@3.8Ghz a bottleneck in some special modes (e.g. "Warfare" in offline mode with 150+ AI) dropping frame-rates as low as 8-10fps from 40-50 (for limited 20-50 AI).

Playing with such processor load is acceptable offline but not online. My question is if you did some tests in BoB online modes that use AI planes (e.g. "battle for resources" mode or something like that). How many AI planes can we expect in online modes without significant frame-rate drops? Is AI scalable enough to include 100+ AI in online mission (not much for 300x400 km map)? Several years ago you mentioned AI in BoB would be scalable to reduce cpu load, i.e. AI that is not visible by a player will have simplified FM, DM, etc.

Could you please tell us which online modes are planned to be included in the release version of BoB?

Anyway we can wait for 16-core CPUs to utilize full BoB potential. Tnx for great games you make!

S!

Nynek, for me AI is just AI..more or less Artificial Idiocy. Just follow it a while and you see how it operates. Not a single sim/game has had a truly inpredictable AI so far. Usually means making AI inhumanely accurate, shortcuts in it's vehicle behaviour etc. Sure coding a complex AI would bring our systems to a crawl while trying to model it all among other things like DM, FM etc.

This said, in any campaign just learn the AI behaviour/quirks. Then it is just to swat them like flies and rack up more kills than any ace ever did in BoB, for example. There are certain patterns games follow and not that hard to spot if you look at it. So "surviving to fight another day" loses it's meaning. Done it so many times before and now having certain expectations regarding SoW: Being something new, the new benchmark.

Anyways, there is a wide variety of opinions and have to respect them. Also the vision of Oleg & Team with SoW. After it has finished installing we will see how it works. And I remain positive on that it will be more than worth the wait.

Love the screen shot...

Will Aces be modeled, one of the great joys i had when fly the venerable old Red Baron 3d back in the day was downing the odd ace.
While it should make no difference to the actual outcome it may be nice from an imersion point of view to fly along side the likes of Molders, Galland or Standford, Tuck or even Bader...

Oleg:
- Will weather be dynamic (change during a mission). Will we see it change with time so that a mission might start with clear weather and end up with a summer storm?

- Will clouds move?

- Will ground textures/trees colour change with the season (on initial release)?

Question to Oleg:

Does the beauty of the backgrounds from the game menu represent your ambition for the graphic quality of the in-game ?

I heard that your team was, among other, working a lot on the cloud modeling. Can we expect to have a similar graphic quality in the game play as in the second background of the game menu ?


Very nice update !

1- Dynamyc weather Yes - It has been said many times in previous BoB threads.
2- If the answer to question 1 is yes -> also yes for question 2 of course.
3- This feature is already available in IL2 and in almost all the best sims on the market, so I'm almost sure that it will be available also in BoB.

I hope that Oleg will confirm that all these features will be present in the first release.

I remember Oleg saying that the trees will not change with the seasons (at least not with the first release). I don't think he mentioned the terrain.

I´ve read a lot of very interesting ideas here about tactical and strategical development of SOW. When I see Il-2, with a very limited log, the comunity has created Air War, Air Domination War and a variety of campaings with a vast complexity in a strategical way. If Sow (and I hope so) comes with a more complex log, and more "tactical" choices, like radars that affect fighters vectoring for example, or triggers, the comunity will do the rest. I bet that a month later the release, a new dinamic campaing system will be out.

The pictures look great, and I can't wait for the release. Speaking of that, is there any new prediction on when SOW will be released?

2 weeks for sure :P

Rumour is next spring...

This post is off topic

OFF TOPIC WILL GET YOU A 7 DAY BAN - first offense

Unless the Geschwaderstab was in the regular habit of flying combat missions, I don't see simulating LW operations above the Gruppe level as being feasible. Otherwise, I like your ideas.

"Today is a hard day... I'm too tired, computer doesn't run well, wheather is bad, etc..."

Take a look at the Date and 'Time' on the Hurricane Screen Shot.

11-26-2010 04:39 AM!

You must live at the place man!

Thank you, to you and your Crew Sir.

Now that's what you call dedication :0

Actually they were. It was expected of them to lead the Geschwader in the air. This was one of the reasons why Göring replaced most JG Kommodores in the middle of August 1940 - the younger replacements (i.e. Mölders, Galland, Schellmann, Trautloft etc) were expected to lead by example.

The older where replaced cos the new weapon needed new tactics which were just developed during the Spainish civil war by Lützow and later Mölders. The old fighters from the Great war couldnt get them (tactics) operational, whiles sitting behind a desk. No one expected, that they really fight any more - although Theo Osterkamp did so very well during the battle.

In pedagogy it is well know that children learn by imitation and mimicry.
Parends are in fact paragons of their children.
Prussia adapted this truth for their military: FÜHREN DURCH VORBILD.
Its in fact a maxime for better Wehrmacht Füherer as well. "leading from the front". Strictly conected to things like honor and a truthfull character building.
Ok, I describe what leads to this, I dont mean, that this virtues are in place; its up to the iduvidual of course. Dont miss understand.
Another point maybe is/was, like today, when ever political leaders cry for the youth, they are so much easier to inveigled and deceived.

I found that LucasFilms' Their Finest Hour (and SWOTL) had a tremendous amount of re-play value because of the strategic side of the game. Trying out different strategies was an exciting part of the game. It had a major weakness in that it simplistically extrapolated from your mission success to all other missions flown and so it was comparatively easy to cripple the enemy if you did well in the mission you flew.

That said, I don't think that Oleg is going to include a strategic component to SOW:BOB. He's never mentioned anything of the sort and, on the contrary, has re-iterated on several occasions that "one pilot could not win the war". I do hope (and expect from what he's said), however, that damage to a Chain Home station will affe3ct the RAF response capability and that that damage will likely carry over from one mission to the next in a campaign.

C_G

I found a video including a short interview with Luthier about SoW BoB.
Maybe someone who understands russian language can translate it.

2:37-4:55

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQiSOC5EN-I


And one more (I think parts of it have already been shown?)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jh1_mly_oZs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jh1_mly_oZs

If the clip starting at 09:20 is from BoB then I think the cloud worriers can stop worrying...

It started off with old material and WoP footage. I don't recall seeing the footage at interval 7:00 to 7:19.

No idea where the footage from 9:19-9:39,10:22-10:29/:40-:45 came from. It looks like it's rendered, because of the camera angles and the motion from the aircraft.

And lovely tracers in the clip starting at 10:23, really mind-blowing graphics there.

That was in a BoB update a while ago.

Yup, that is fascinating footage, almost looks too good to be true.

Footage near the end came from here, at a guess the interviewer was asking Oleg and Luthier's opinions and thoughts on WoP and the video below.

[youtube]pmlk99ENutw[/youtube]

Actually, I think that is based on this original CGI (?). Maybe this is the footage shown.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hG8BoXXOp4

Reminds me of a "Discovery" or "National Geographic Channel" show, where they did a war-vehicles head-to-head and that would have been the Spit vs. 109 part.

If the interview was purely about SoW, it was bad that they used footage from different sources.

Nope, it's from the one I linked, watch it again. Either way it's not from Oleg's BoB.

One of the original things Oleg talked about many years ago was using the SOW engine for making CGI for film/television. 'Maybe' the interview was showing what it is capiable of in this mode. It may have nothing to do with the game version of the engine or the engine at all.

Without being able to speak Russian we should not jump to conclusions about anything seen in the interview.

'IF' the graphics are half as good as whats shown in the video's when SOW is released I'll be taking my long service leave, booking my family in for a months holiday in Bali and not tell them that I won't be comming till I get them through the gates at the airport!


Cheers!

in that interview with luthier i think they do flash an expected release date on the screen a few times ("something russian" 2011), like they do for the other games being previewed in the same tv show clip

anybody here read russian ? its a single word that precedes 2011, not a "1e quarter" type english statment that would be 2 words in english

since it seems clear we dont get a november/december release now (bit sad after all the hype at the russian game expo presentation), and its to late for any kind of pre xmass marketing drive, i'd say that means late feb 2011 by the earliest

That "something russian" is just "release"...no season, no month:(