SOW: your thoughts on clickable cockpits and realistic start-up

[PE_Tigar]

nearmiss - dude, me and several of my friends do fly real airplanes, and no - we can't really fly and fight in a P-47 or La-7, but we'd like to be able to have the simulated experience of the same. We also like to fly WWII-era planes, and don't have $4k an hour to fly in a Mustang... besides, you can't shoot anyone down these days .

The whole SOW project now looks extremely attractive, but real systems management and modelling would make it perfect. And you can always switch that option off if you wish, nobody preventing you from doing that.

[SlipBall]

+1...

[Snuff_Pidgeon]

+2

[Skoshi Tiger]

Originally Posted by 99th_Flyby

I'm glad SOMEONE knows why Oleg does what he does! Know when he's gonna do another update? But I see your point. Oleg is not in the business of doing study sims so far, only survey sims. Is that it? Speaking to better use of resources, I stll have not divined why he is allocating resources to elaborately detail some many ground objects in SoW_BoB. Got any ideas? Perhaps he's got those objects tied to a secret campaign feature? Knock out the radars and create gaps in the detection grid; attack targets through the grid gaps without interception? Something like that? Maybe in an online campaign scenario?
Flyby out

With AI and human players being vectored on to targets by RDF would I hope that that taking out a radar facility would effect a sides ability to react to threats. Also getting lost in ground clutter and comming in under the radar might have a purpose.

I wonder if the Observer corp will be simulated as a backup?

[II/JG54_Emil]

I wonder if the ground-objects are so detailed because you can actually use other features. May something like a 1st person shooter, to fight your way back home from enemy lines. Why would it be possible to walk through trains or use flaks???

Anyhow I´m a fan of complex realism in sims. And if this sim offers the feature of i.e. repairing the engine after it was shot up, I would appreciate it.

We´re talking about a feature that can be added any time or not by the host of the game.

It would be great to have it.

[II./JG1_Krupinski]

It certainly would add a level of immersion for both complex engine start up and and click able pits.

However, Oleg said before that he queried the community and it was about a 1 in 100 response for click able pits. Personally, I don't know why he wouldn't put it in - all other sims are able to use it or not.

But the complex engine management / startup is pretty much a must now. This certainly can be switched on and off and won't get in the way of anyone, but the immersion it will add to the community would be astounding.

But I don't think he'll even attempt to start clickpits. You ever try to do that it FSX or BoBII with TIR? It's a PITA! and that's an understatement. But, using the keyboard and watching the actions is much better.

[nearmiss]

Guess I'm not getting it said. LOL

We have the C.E.M., which I think is a bit much as well.

I guess, if we have clickable cockpits, full real startups, C.E.M.,probablistic failures and emergency procedures, then of course we need no waypoint following maps, or other automatic nav tools. In other words, in WW2 they had to follow landmarks and use old ADF tones for navigation. Then of course we need to throw in the stuff that happens, where wingman turns back and you have to follow, one bomb sticks in the racks, one or more guns quit working, you come upon a flak forest and one pass is all you can make and stay alive.

In other words, there are plenty of elements and things that need to go with full real startups and clicking cockpits. Guess it all depends on how far you want to take this thing.

IMO, we need a great mission builder tool like the old MSFT CFS2. You can't imagine how much enjoyment you can get out of recreating and flying historical missions. It gives you a feel for what those WW2 pilots dealt with and the difficulty of it all.

The old MSFT CFS2 is still a very vibrant community. The mission builder tool keeps the sim experience exceptional. There is still a large 3rd party development community constantly pumping new life into the sim.

So... if we get a great mission builder tool, and the stuff others want we'll have best for all.

Face it, this is probably not worth all the words. Oleg will do what he plans to do... regardless.

[Bearcat]

Clkickable pits are a waste IMO as well.. however having the ability to have every switch that has a function move in the pit is not a bad idea..... as well as having the option for more complex CEM..

[Antoninus]

So changing view to watch an animated battery switch is no waste of time but using maybe one extra second to click on it instead of using the keyboard is.

At least we will have such fully animated cockpits in SOW and it's certainly better
than nothing, since you can quickly check the status of systems and see if the
awkward key combo has done the right thing.

However I fail to see the benefits of such an half-way implementation of an interactive cockpit compared to a fully clickable VC. So an aircraft designer already has to make a fully modeled VC, assign commands to all switches and animate them, thus all the work to make a clickable cockpit for MSFS. Of course they save once a little bit of development time that can be used to make more overly detailed ground objects or research the correct number plates for all German and British army divisions.

[Flyby]

two weeks and we'll see what's what. (j/k)