URGENT! Oleg, please look here...The Enemy is comming!
 

Oleg, please look here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsPjn...layer_embedded.

I see a huge treat... Coming from above...

Thats what meant when I was saying all these years, that going deep in to the simulation is the proper way of wining the Battle for the Sky... Not many aircrafts, but a few, but excellent.

So, Oleg check Your 6...

~S!

Nice aircraft, but nothing for Oleg to worry about. A2A doesn't have very good software to make it flyable. They can use FSX, but its not the best option. They have the BOB WOV Merlin (sp?) game engine but that is a brute to work with. They are just now finally after years of hard work getting an extra aircraft working with that engine.

I suppose A2A could make aircraft for the SOW engine. This could be good for SOW and A2A.

S!

FSX or not, that B17G looked damn nice! B17 Flying Fortress II had similar things modelled, like engine management, engine limits etc. Makes me wanna fire her up again, the box is on the shelf :D

it looks an absolutely beautiful sim. though i don't think it has any of the combat elements to it. hopefully in the not too distant future we will start to see SOW expand to include B-17 missions over europe, escorted by P-51s, etc.

I think SoW will be as good as that or even better. We'll see it in the future.

I seriously doubt Oleg needs or wants business advice from people here on this forum.

Looks great!

Butttt can you blow anything up with it? Or fire the guns? No because it's FSX.

While it looks like an amazingly modeled aircraft, flying it in modern times with no weapons or no fear of 190s coming out of the sky to kill you just doesn't seem right.

Well, excellent but for example on the first look I have noticed no selfshadowing.. I think Oleg is gonna have everything on the whole new level.. What I think he should yet take as the bar to shift above MSFS quality, are the clouds and weather system..

O.

Lord, I couldn't listen to more than a minute of that commentary. It is awful. Someone teach him proper pronunciation, please... And opening your mouth while speaking does also help a lot...

that thing is so cool, screensaver or not, its so cool to try and start it up but engine number 4 won't get enough oil pressure so u gotta keep cranking it till it does, or u mess up and kill ur battery in 2 minutes cause u turn all ur lights on, or ur flying along and all of a sudden one of ur superchargers goes nuts and you fry a single cylinder on an engine... not to mention the fact that ur supercharger just died on that engine... or stuff like that... its not just u fly around... you gotta keep ur plane maintained and keep an eye on everything, cause u never know how worn down the parts are or how quickly they'll wear.

but its no threat to SOW... FSX is designed for simulating single aircraft (yes i realize there's multiplayer too), but not a whole battlefield, with tanks, bombs, bullets, etc...

I think having bombers in SoW with the A2A level realism would be doable, but could you imagine dogfighting while having to keep an eye on so much stuff as well as having to worry about wear on pretty much every single part of your plane too...

Looks interesting but each sim has it's place and IL-2 is so appealing because there is a LARGE number of aircraft simulated. Depth is important but in this area so is breadth. It's great to be able to simulate so many different battle areas (some that are commonly neglected) and I hope for more of the same with Storm of War.

You mean, like they actually had to do in reality? ;)

I'm all for having to manage things like that while fighting, because it will force people to fight in a realistic manner. When you know you'll blow your engine by diving a mere 5000 feet due to the increase in air pressure, it won't be long before everyone learns to adjust important bits before commiting to the attack. What does that mean? That unless i can judge engine operating limits by ear, i will either have to keep my eyes on the manifold pressure gauge (not too good when i'm trying to BnZ someone) or forget about prolonged full throttle dives and reduce my throttle a bit before i even dive.

And this is actually the essence of how pilots came to be divided into rookies, experienced ones, talented ones, or simply mediocre but careful/succesful ones, not by some arbitrary stat but by the variety of factors that forced them to evolve their individual styles.
Someone might be a terrible shot but be an expert on pushing the aircraft to its limits without breaking it, enabling him to get that tracking shot and score his kills. Meanwhile, another guy might be unskilled in maneuvering and multi-tasking the operating limits during combat, but he's such a meticulous planner and knows when to press the trigger that their scores are similar.

More things to worry about is something i look forward to, because a) the enemy has to worry about the same things so we're on an equal footing (i could be bailing due to a row of broken cylinder heads, but i could also be getting a kill on someone who did the same) and b)it will lead into an evolution of many skill subsets and personal styles when flying online.

The only counter-arguments are development time/cost (but it's been confirmed already that we'll be getting such complexity in SoW) and the fact that the interface to control all those knobs and buttons might be lacking. On the other hand, A2A does a very clever thing and doesn't force you to use one method. In fact, if we get multi-engined bombers later on in SoW, i would be all for copying their interface.
You can pan around with TrackIR and click stuff in the virtual cockpit, you can assign it to your HOTAS/keyboard, or you can just bring up the pop-up command panel and have all the main controls neatly groupped up regardless of your keyboard layout or wether you can bend your neck enough to pan and click with trackIR (for those hard to reach switches). There's 3 ways to use every single one of the important functions and you can also use all 3 of them at the same time, so everyone will be able to find something that's comfortable for them.

Yes, i really can't wait until i get to manage all that stuff, have to worry about wear and tear and also have enemy fighters intercept me, because it gives me something challenging to do even when the enemy fighters have returned to base :grin:

Even if the A2A B17 had a combat area to fly in it would be no threat too Olegs sim, but it could give some few hours of enjoyment to those that fly civilian and combat flight sims. It takes more than just an aircraft to make a sim, just ask those that flew B17 11. It had alot of potential.

No it doesn't , jeez ever tried DCS Black Shark...
One aircraft is more than enough when done right, DCS currently holds the market as the most realistic customer simulation out there for sure, not even IL2 gets close.

One aircraft does hold the potential to make a sim if it's done really really well. I agree. The question is just WHICH ONE -- on an economical level. You can make "single aircraft" sims with aircraft that common people know, attractive aircraft like the legendary B17, or maybe the Spitfire too, maybe with a Corsair, for the American market. I already very much doubt you can make it with a Hurricane. Or a Me109. Not even to mention a Fokker, a Fiat or all of the other stuff. It doesn't draw enough people to be economically viable.

Also, if you make a single aircraft or heli sim, your campaign will be tailored around that aircraft. I think except as far as the technical simulation of the machine goes that you want to portray, the simulation of war will always be poorer than in a sim like IL2 or the CFS series.

A2A series not have one only one italian plane shame A2A shame you ignoring ITALY? shame.

A2A series not have respect in this world not exist only america but exist also another nation.

ITALY AND GERMANY is FIRST state of aeronatical tecnology and experience ante-post WW1 and WW2 and post WW1 WW2 American after copy eurpean tecnology to europe.

you loock P47 yes american copy italy desine of reggiane 2000 why most italian live in america and new york during ww2 have good italian comunity.

i repsect most most 1C company and Daidalos team because developers italian plane tank you you is a serious company.

example:FSX not have a just texture terrain of Europe not have complicate mesh terrain of ITALIAN ALPS the big mountain in all europe this is not respect in confront of european peoples not respect the EUROPEAN STANDARDS.

:confused:

(Or, should I say, :rolleyes: )

Republic Aviation was originally known as the Seversky Aircraft Company, founded by a Russian WWI veteran and staffed (at least initially) by engineers from the former Russian empire. It was Seversky's P-35 from which Italian engineers loosely based the Re.2000.

Keep making yourself look like a fool though. It's good fun. :-P

yes yes just observation SOVIETIC UNION have 2 exemplar of p-35 but not have project.
After the ING.ROBERTO LONGHI PROJECT THE REGGIANE 2000 inspiration to p35.

Sorry LukeFF but my teory to america copy european tecnology during ww2 remain in my mind.

My God. How short sighted can you all be??? This is not the enemy. This is potentially the best friend SoW could have.

Oleg has said many times that 3rd party and professional works will be allowed compatability in SoW. What if A2A and other companies produced aircraft like this that can be installed into SoW the same way such addons can be added to FSX? Don't you see? This is where Maddox Games will finally get to make a decent living, by creating a 3rd party industry around SoW. Sow will help sell copies of professionally made addon aircraft, and these addons will help sell more copies of SoW.

If Oleg is smart, he'll be negotiating with A2A and others to allow them to produce versions of future aicraft that can run in the SoW environment... for a fee.

SoW has the potential to bury FSX for customers who are into the short-hop flights. Don't willfully misunderstand me. I'm not talking about the 747's and whatnot. I'm talking about the civil types like Dragon Rapides etc, classic warbirds like the B-17 above and everything else in between. SoW has the potential to corner the market as a Classic Flight simulator. Not just a Combat flight simulator. No way can they make an Il-2 sized planeset on their own though. Opening SoW to commercial and 3rd party expansion is the key.

I must say, I'm suprised no one even mentioned it. :rolleyes:

Good strategy indeed. I dream for the day, when company under such name will be established: UNITED SIMULATIONS CORPORATION PLC.

Sounds goooooooooooooooooooood!
~S!

Planes from Third Party Developers
 

Yep, the plan really is to get these third party developers to make content for Storm of War. I think it will be good. Probably a bit pricy to buy a lot of planes, but if they can make that favorite one to a super high level, nothing left out, I'll consider spending.

Does anyone recall if it was mentioned how compatibility would be solved when third party aircraft are entered? I think that it was said that the third party developers would submit their planes, and if of high enough standard they would be included and distributed with SoW patches/updates. Then one would have to pay to unlock it as flyable. But always be able to see other people who fly it.

The thought is appealing to me in ways because it could mean that people are more dedicated to learning a specific aircraft (in hardcore realism mode) correctly.

*chanting* Bf 110 - Bf 110 - Bf 110 - Bf 110 - Bf 110!!! :eek: :grin:

It was mentioned :)

DCS Black Shark isn't a threat to SOW either.

I agree 157%. Personally, the reason i didn't mention it is that i've said it a few times in the past and it seems so reasonable anyway that it doesn't even need to be mentioned :grin:

Here's to hoping that we get people like A2A get into a licensing agreement with Oleg's team. On one hand the cost of some individual aircraft tends to get a bit prohibitive for FSX who buy lots of add-ons, on the other hand when a team focuses on a single aircraft it's sure going to be detailed like hell. Plus, if there's some "screening" by Oleg's team in regards to FM/DM so that it can be used in multiplayer, that's a lot of extra value right there.

What if we went one step further and had entire theaters and conflicts made? Imagine for example if the guys who made Over Flanders Fields on the CFS engine started getting interested on using the SoW engine.
They have their historical research so over-the-top-refined that you can actually fly a mission with a famous ace and you'll see the exact same weather conditions that Manock or Richthoffen faced over that sector of the front on that day 90 or so years ago, struggling with the turbulence in the exact same paintjob they were sporting in real life. It just begs for an up to date game engine. SoW quality biplanes+90% or more historical accuracy? Sure, give me, i'd pay full price for an OFF remake based on the SoW engine. ;)

Ah drama just to let you look at it
 

Yes it is a real treat!

A2A makes awesome stuff, and I agree with the notion that they'd do some great stuff as 3rd parties with BOB SOW.

FSX engine might have some aspects better than IL-2, but not BOB SOW. And BOB SOW you can actually shoot, bomb, rocket stuff, and it has the physics built into the engine, not coded in later as an afterthought like FSX mods.

Regarding the guy's voice narrating, sounds like a American teenager doing it, hence the pronunciation deviances.

I just hope BOB SOW uses better and more realistic sounds like A2A's stuff uses.

I think third party companies will be eagerly awaiting the day when they can sell their aircraft for use with SoW.
How many of us would be willing to pay for that B17/P40/etc. if we could use them in Sow? I imagine quite a few of us. And most people playing IL2 (future SoW customers) don't even use FSX, so this is a whole new market for those companies.

It's a win-win situation for Oleg and third party companies. Oleg can free up a lot of time and energy that would have gone into producing new aircraft.

I imagine he might want to set certain conditions, ie stipulate that they do a lower poly model (or models with various Levels of Detail).

I wonder how long it will take before Team D' give up on IL2 and start making models for SoW.

Only if there is a very sophisticated and trouble free implementation system present. Otherwise, it will be just like it turned out with the MODs. A number of different versions, different settings and all you end up with is a divided online community. I'm sure it is a fine feature for offliners, which FS is a fine example of, but I yet have to be convinced that it will guarantee a smooth online gaming experience.

Besides, I prefer my game environment to be coherent. A hyper poly model amongst other regular ones would stick out like a sore thumb.

Oleg said previously that the Su-26 would be available as a how-to model for future third party development. He also said there would be two online modes. Mods-0n and Mods-off.

One would imagine that 3rd party aircraft and addons would be for offline use mostly. Unless manufacturers do something similar to Rise of Flight and release the external model for free, but only charge for the cockpit.

It ( the A2A B-17) looks to be a great model... too bad about FSX though... I could get the terrain shudder under control and high frame rates but just couldn't get rid of some textures flickering and AI aircraft jittering; just like CFS3

I've always thought a well made sandbox with a few highly detailed tonka trucks, tractors and cranes to go with it and then allow others to bring in other bits and pieces to be the go, but FSX seems to have been hand in hand with 3rd party developers from the beginning... to get the good stuff that should have been part of FSX from the go get, cost a small fortune.

dunno... some people just seem to like an overstocked stable of planes they're never likely to use and keep pushing for more, instead of pushing for more detailed out of the box planes.

Oleg, I (fwiw) would rather see a few exceptionally detailed planes (systems/ flight mechanics/ atmospherics, etc) than a whole armada of averagely detailed planes. An experience out of the box. so to speak... as FSX was a let down

Actually considering that the Su-26 is included (and Oleg presumably wants third party companies to release similar aircraft for SoW), the title 'Storm-of-War' seems a bit inaccurate. I can imagine that SoW could easily become as important as FSX is to some gamers who are only interested in civilian aircraft -or who are maybe just learning to fly.

The game we're all using is called Il-2.....and yet we can fly spits, hurris etc....

:D

I just can't see a civilian flight school advising their pupils to buy 'Storm of War' in order to practice at home.
'FSX' - yes. I'm sure it happens all the time.

Are we even sure the final product will actually be called 'Storm of War' anyway?

No, it's going to be called flowers of friendship :grin:

But regarding a civvie sim I can see what you mean; although Storm of War may just be the title of any war-related sim. Any others may have a different branch.

Reality check in order here.

Home PC flight sims are in the same context as
Home PC driving sims

The point being more of you have driven a car than flown planes, so the experience is comparable in as much as a driving sim will teach you nothing except where the switches and gauges are and what to do procedurally on the road.

The same applies to Home PC flight sims combat or commercial you are only learning inputs and procedures, not how to actually fly or as it really is, most wouldn't be able to taxi an aircraft let alone take off or land :)

So take it for what it is ........ a bit of fun.



.

My point is that lots of potential pilots, and people learning how to fly in the real world who DO use FSX.
I think there are teaching missions and a 'flight school' in FSX . At least there were in older versions of Flight simulator. These were very well done, there were 'talk over' instructions from a simulated instructor telling you what to do, starting with very basic manoeuvres, and explaining for example that: 'when you turn, one wing is moving faster than the other and therefore generating more lift' - very useful!!!

To reach this market, and also to reach those who only fly civilian aircraft in FSX, Oleg's game really requires a neutral name, unconnected with war.

Not that it's a big deal to me, it was just an idea.
I'll fly it anyway, whatever it's called.

I suggest:

Civilian or Warplane (CoW).
General Aviation Sim, though really including Combat (GAStriC).
Combat Aviation, Real Physics (CRAP).
Aeronautical Simulation Software (ASS).

:-)

No

People learn how to navigate, not fly using home PC sims :)

Its the same as a driving sim you cant learn how to drive using one.

The point is that in Flight Simulator or FSX you can learn and train procedures.
Starting with the check lists up to fire in a engine procedures.
It doesnt give the feeling but still a kind of immersion a book or a video can't give.
Of course there are also the navigation procedures to learn.

Storm of Wanking; everyone's reaction when the sim is finally released.

Flight sims are very useful for learning to fly.
 

While it's true that simulators make excellent procedures trainers (and are superior to simply tacking the cockpit poster to the wall...) you CAN learn to fly using a flight simulator. Could you learn enough to pass the private pilot practical? Maybe not. But you could certainly learn enough to takeoff, fly about and then land. Maybe not with a lot of flair, but completely doable.

I come to this conclusion based on years of flight instructing and the experience of giving introductory flights. Giving intro flights to people who had never been in an airplane before, I found that I could talk around 75% of people through a takeoff and around 25% through a landing without me ever touching the controls. I am convinced that a person who had access to a decent flight sim with controls that are similar to the airplane available (yoke, rudders, engine controls) and they became proficient at taxiing, takeoff, flight, and landing in the sim, then they could do the same in the actual aircraft.

I actually did this so it's true. My wife bought me a flying lesson and when I told the instructor I played flight sims he skipped the briefing and we hopped straight on the plane. I then taxied, took off flew around for an hour(in Blackpool, England) and then landed. All down to flying sims on the PC.