Will SoW be boring and superficial?

[Feathered_IV]

Getting back on topic...

I very much hope that AI intelligence also extends further than just the pilots and gunners too.

Currently aircraft follow a predetermined path until they blunder into each other. Then a fight begins. I'm hoping that some kind of central intelligence will be present in SoW too. You cross the enemy lines, fighters are directed to your location/ transports are ushered away etc. Flying below radar height would suddenly mean something from a tactical point of view. Rather than just the isolated skirmishes of the Il-2 series, I'd like to see the enemy hive-mind represented.

[ArcticViper]

Originally Posted by leitmotiv

46 Is now so primitive in terms of the art of rendering the entire spectrum of effects, no matter what comes from the FSX system will be vastly superior to a rather tired and ancient product. If this doesn't excite all but the most die-hard 46 gamer, you don't care for airplanes:

As for no AI, this would make BOBSOW into an online-only item, and that would mean a flying RED ORCHESTRA. God forbid that. That would guarantee the missions would never be advanced beyond the stereotypical model of mass dogfights and some bomb droppers for fighters to attack.

No, No and No!

The community is actually releasing new graphic features, and if you say that it is old in terms of graphics, then clearly you haven't tried to change the config.ini file. You can set antialiasing far far up, water effects up, in other words, this 5'ish year old game will look like it hit the market a year ago, or possibly with a better system than I have, today! allaircraftarcade has 6.000+ members, loads and loads of great mods for this supremely excellent game.

And I quote you again: "As for no AI, this would make BOBSOW into an online-only item"

Read what I mean, not what I write! I meant that NO AIRCRAFT should be flyable by the AI only, meaning the player should have access to all planes in the game, not that AI should be removed

I do fly FSX quite often, but being a pilot myself, and seeing how it reacts to the enviroment and simulates different events and situations, I feel that FSX has a lot to learn from IL-2, so stop promoting that game here, go to the relevant FSX forum, please. We don't want a flame war in here, because you will inevitably lose.

[Steiner362]

Originally Posted by Feathered_IV

That is the reason I posted it. I also thought it was very much like something very much like you'd find on an X-box. But you will find nothing even close to it in a Maddox game. And cetainly nothing that can compete, even with something as simple as that.

I'm sure you understand where I'm going with this. I am hoping that Oleg and his team will surpass it in SoW. I am tired of the same two mission types over and over. No one is trying to put down this sim. It is just a matter of drawing attention to what has been missing in the soul of the Il-2 series, with a fervent hope it will be addressed in the next offering.

With all due respect this is a combat flight simulator,I'm not sure what more you want from the il2series it does what it says on the box,sure you want more dynamic missons but just how far do you wish to go>?

[Feathered_IV]

Originally Posted by Steiner362

With all due respect this is a combat flight simulator,I'm not sure what more you want from the il2series it does what it says on the box,sure you want more dynamic missons but just how far do you wish to go>?

I'd like to see it go so far as to incorporate all the mission types outlined in the first post.

[Avimimus]

It would indeed be nice to see time period and side specific tactics being used by flights. I remember numerous accounts of flights attempting to outclimb each other for quite a while before the fight. Or two flights entering into a turning fight (but in a single large circle) and slashing one pass ambush attacks being conducted.

Anything that could add meaning to transport, escort, strike, recon or liason flights would also be of value. Hopefully the triggers will allow for displaying text with conversations between crew members at certain times or even audio files.

It would also be nice if it became possible to have some plot branches in the linear campaign or even the ability to change text based options in the briefing screen (and thus alter future events in the mission).

[K_Freddie]

I only request a SDK, map and object creator/editor. The FM's can stay as is.

[Ratsack]

I'd particularly like to see the night fighters modeled with AI that works. Even more, I'd like the multiplayer code set up so two players can crew the same plane. This would be great for bombers like the Ju 87, and for planes like the Defiant and Me 110. It would also make the night fighter experience really cool.

cheers,
Ratsack

[csThor]

I hadn't followed this thread but now that I've re-read the initial post I started thinking. And actually I think there are a few issues that may cause some disappointment.

I've played Il-2 since the initial demo came out and I've had contact with Oleg for even longer. All this time has formed a picture of the team "Maddox Games" in my head - and that picture is not all nice and cosy when it comes to inspiring gameplay. To me Maddox Games seems to consist mostly of "engineer developers" and not "gamer developers" as they seem to approach the problems of a combat flight simulation from the purely technical POV. They're going to great lenghts to simulate aircraft, weapons and flight but they never seemed to put any ressources into advancing the gameplay, to allow for a broader and more versatile mission base. Even DGen was an external development and so it had to deal with not being an integral part of the game's engine. Oleg himself said more than once that he has no use for dynamic campaigns and greatly prefers hand-made static campaigns because of their greater accuracy and to some degree he was right.

The problem of this POV is that seems to be diametrically opposed to what his target audience in "the West" thinks. I am not sure if I'm merely rehashing old stereotypes, but there seems to be the tendency within russian (or eastern european) development teams to go for the minimalist approach regarding gameplay. The hardware they want to simulate was often displayed in great accuracy and detail, but the gameplay part - the single missions, the campaigns, the online modes etc - always seemed to lack the same amount of enthusiasm and thoroughness. Is that the result of a drastically different POV in the russian simulation community? Or do the russian developers really think that simmers are satisfied just with well-simulated aircraft?
I mean what made the "great sims of the past" so great? Aces over Europe, Aces of the Pacific, EAW, Red Baron ... They're not even remotely comparable to what modern sims could achieve (tech-wise), but they have earned their special place in our hearts because they had immersive and capturing gameplay!

Maybe I'm doing Oleg and his team a disservice, but I think they should really take a look at the "blockbuster sims" of the past and why they had the following they had. If the russian market is content with just a fundament for dogfights and making missions so be it. I, however, know that there's more to a good combat flight sim than just a perfect FM/DM and astonishing visual effects. It has to have an offline campaign that does not rely on aftermarket products to be immersive and it needs to "weave a net" that captures the player's imagination. My 0,02 € ...

[Blackdog_kt]

I pretty much agree on the analysis about some of the older sims mentioned. I still remember Red Baron 1 and 2, Secret weapons of the luftwafe, aces of the pacific, aces over europe, etc.

For me, the best sim would be a hybrid between IL2 and European Air War. If you can combine the FM/DM/graphics from IL2 and the immersion factor from EAW, you'll have a real blockbuster on your hands. EAW is an old game by today's standards but it has a lot of things i'd like to see in a future project from Oleg.

First of all, the AI actually follows orders, complex orders. There was a very detailed method of controlling your wingmen to make concentrated attacks before breaking off, by use of the "rejoin" command. If you issued a disengage command they would do that and join up with you. However, rejoin tells them to stay in formation but not disengage. Which means that if you issue an order to attack bombers and then immediately tell them to rejoin, your wingmen will stay in formation while you circle around those bombers and they will attack whatever the formation's course presents them with. Ie, you can make head on attacks against a group of 36 bombers with as many as 12 planes in your flight in EAW.

Another thing is the menu graphics in most of the old sims. For example, there was a briefing room/tent with the map, then you clicked somewhere on the edge of the screen to go to the hangar where you could see some planes being prepared, then exit the hangar to fly. These don't even have to be real 3D images, just some static screens showing representative areas in an airfield. The top aces chalkboard in Red Baron, the Dora running engine checks in the background in EAW, your squadron roster showing your AI wingmen's kills and who is missing/killed/captured, all of these things add a lot to making you feel you are actually there and not in front of a computer monitor in your room.

Another thing is the ability to have random encounters with air and ground targets. This could be done by giving the FMB a series of parameters that it can then randomise. For example, scripting a 30% chance that a flight of 109s will spawn 10kms from you and bounce your escort group on the way home. Or even better, they spawn on the ground at a suitable airfield while you are heading in, they set up CAP under instruction from German ground control and wait for you to turn for home before attacking you. All in all, a detailed AI will open up more options for tactical variety.

[Tata]

Very good posts of csThor and Blackdog
+10