"Wings" Of Prey (PC). Watchout Oleg!

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Eagle Dynamics also has some pretty good-looking environment, specially if we're talking about DCS. Again, very low settings, so it does not show the full potential of the sim.

[diveplane]

am really enjoying wings of prey , it has a lot of potential , imo its middle of the road in terms of flight models.

very enjoyable.

[yakaddict]

Originally Posted by 13th Hsqn Protos

S~!

Its ok, but it reminds me of IL2. The scale is the same ..... off.

Can't touch the terrain in the Wings of Prey -- my favorite map is 'Bulge'. I can't ask for more than this.

I personally don't care for that kind of grass. It would be fine in a tank or infrantry sim but seems out of place/unnecessary to me. IMHO not single cpu cycle should be spent on waving grass.

W.o.P has done terrain properly for a flight sim.

However ..... taste is a personal thing. Good flights in RoF.

I just dont see how the terrain is much better than RoF at altitude. I dont mind the grass, it makes it more immersive and on my computer ran at max graphics at a high fps level. People with older machines might take issue however. Im not sure what you mean by scale, as I felt the same flying RoF and WoP in terms of scale, only that RoF actually has a good flight model (very good actually). There isnt too much to expect from a ww1 flight sim anyway, cuz honestly, there wasnt that much going on in the air in that time...ground forces and stuff would be nice though. Dcs black shark has both scale and great physics and I love it, only the coding is so bad that it slows down on max graphics on a brand new gaming rig so thats rather tragic. A good flight sim, to me, should have good graphics and good physics, and that includes the flight model of black shark or RoF and graphics such as grass, good shadows, reflections etc. RoF has both, Dcs has them too. WoP has potential, unfortunately that is all it has for now, its too arcadish, both in flight model and options. Ill be waiting till SoW comes out or WoP is realistic enough to give it a second look, but honestly flight model should be the most important consideration when making a sim. Just my (long) opinion.

[Desode]

Originally Posted by yakaddict

I just dont see how the terrain is much better than RoF at altitude. I dont mind the grass, it makes it more immersive and on my computer ran at max graphics at a high fps level. People with older machines might take issue however. Im not sure what you mean by scale, as I felt the same flying RoF and WoP in terms of scale, only that RoF actually has a good flight model (very good actually). There isnt too much to expect from a ww1 flight sim anyway, cuz honestly, there wasnt that much going on in the air in that time...ground forces and stuff would be nice though. Dcs black shark has both scale and great physics and I love it, only the coding is so bad that it slows down on max graphics on a brand new gaming rig so thats rather tragic. A good flight sim, to me, should have good graphics and good physics, and that includes the flight model of black shark or RoF and graphics such as grass, good shadows, reflections etc. RoF has both, Dcs has them too. WoP has potential, unfortunately that is all it has for now, its too arcadish, both in flight model and options. Ill be waiting till SoW comes out or WoP is realistic enough to give it a second look, but honestly flight model should be the most important consideration when making a sim. Just my (long) opinion.

I have a question so you can finish the whole campaign and single missions on full Sim mode with Limited fuel and limited ammo and no retrys ?

I'd love to see someone do this and post a video of each mission. I'm personally finding myself hard pressed to pull it off.

Desode

[yakaddict]

Originally Posted by Desode

I have a question so you can finish the whole campaign and single missions on full Sim mode with Limited fuel and limited ammo and no retrys ?

I'd love to see someone do this and post a video of each mission. I'm personally finding myself hard pressed to pull it off.

Desode

I believe so. I dont have the unlocked version. Its the full game but in demo mode (weird I know) but yo ucan as far as I can tell. Unfortunately what gets me is that the sim mode isnt realistic enough, not that the game has arcade modes, which is fine with me.

[Desode]

Originally Posted by yakaddict

I believe so. I dont have the unlocked version. Its the full game but in demo mode (weird I know) but yo ucan as far as I can tell. Unfortunately what gets me is that the sim mode isnt realistic enough, not that the game has arcade modes, which is fine with me.

What isn't realistic enough about it ? Be specific, so the Dev's know what your talking about. They have said they are willing to work with the Sim Community to change things but people have to be specific.

What do you find different between the FM of Il2 1946 and WOP ?
I play both and have flown each plane from WOP then switched to Il2 and flew the same plane and I can't tell much difference. They stall and spin at the same speeds and everything. The only thing I can think it people have their Stick sensitivity set different on the 2 games. If you tweek the sensitivity on both games so they match you will see the FM are the same.

I'm not trying to argue in any way , I just want to understand what you mean you, so I can check it out and post it for the Dev team.
Desode
PS
The first couple of missions are pretty easy even on sim but the missons get Crazy hard pretty fast. How many missions can you fly in the demo ?

[yakaddict]

Originally Posted by Desode

What isn't realistic enough about it ? Be specific, so the Dev's know what your talking about. They have said they are willing to work with the Sim Community to change things but people have to be specific.

What do you find different between the FM of Il2 1946 and WOP ?
I play both and have flown each plane from WOP then switched to Il2 and flew the same plane and I can't tell much difference. They stall and spin at the same speeds and everything. The only thing I can think it people have their Stick sensitivity set different on the 2 games. If you tweek the sensitivity on both games so they match you will see the FM are the same.

I'm not trying to argue in any way , I just want to understand what you mean you, so I can check it out and post it for the Dev team.
Desode
PS
The first couple of missions are pretty easy even on sim but the missons get Crazy hard pretty fast. How many missions can you fly in the demo ?

Cool. Ok the planes I tried, spitfire and p-51, this is whats wrong (mostly with the spitfire, I havent tried the 51 enough). Its too easy to land, the narrow landing gear isnt simulated well enough to display the dangerous effects of a bad landing. The cannon and machine guns sound the same and have about the same damage effect (or lack thereof randomly). Damage to the airframe appears to have little effect on the flight model (I have yet to evaluate that more thouroughly in the simulator mode). The plane climbs too agressively. I reached altitude too fast and at too high an angle of attack, and the stalls are either on or off, the spinning which appears great, is actually too easy to exit and stabilize. The plane accelerates from standstill to tail airbourne and then wheels off the ground too quickly and in general it appears to have too much lift at the wings. The plane also accelerates to maximum velocity much faster than it should, its far too powerfull (maximum velocity does seem about right though). I will evaluate the 51 more but thats what I saw with the spit, then Ill get back to you. Its not that the flight model is BAD, it isnt really. Its just far enough away from real to make it annoying because you can see all its potential sitting right there. Also, a nice panel of switches for in game realism settings like il2 has would be a great option to have beside the 3 main arcade, real, and simulator settings. Hope that clarifies my opinion a bit.

[Desode]

Originally Posted by yakaddict

Cool. Ok the planes I tried, spitfire and p-51, this is whats wrong (mostly with the spitfire, I havent tried the 51 enough). Its too easy to land, the narrow landing gear isnt simulated well enough to display the dangerous effects of a bad landing. The cannon and machine guns sound the same and have about the same damage effect (or lack thereof randomly). Damage to the airframe appears to have little effect on the flight model (I have yet to evaluate that more thouroughly in the simulator mode). The plane climbs too agressively. I reached altitude too fast and at too high an angle of attack, and the stalls are either on or off, the spinning which appears great, is actually too easy to exit and stabilize. The plane accelerates from standstill to tail airbourne and then wheels off the ground too quickly and in general it appears to have too much lift at the wings. The plane also accelerates to maximum velocity much faster than it should, its far too powerfull (maximum velocity does seem about right though). I will evaluate the 51 more but thats what I saw with the spit, then Ill get back to you. Its not that the flight model is BAD, it isnt really. Its just far enough away from real to make it annoying because you can see all its potential sitting right there. Also, a nice panel of switches for in game realism settings like il2 has would be a great option to have beside the 3 main arcade, real, and simulator settings. Hope that clarifies my opinion a bit.

Now thats good info, Make sure to post this at the DEV forums http://forum.yuplay.com/ under the WOP section.

Aslo

Make sure you have your sensetivity increased in WOP. It will effect the FM characteristics. I would recommed starting with it at High and then coming down till you find the FM's spins and stalls matching Il2 1946 for the same plane.
The Fm's in Wop are from directly from Il2 and Oleg is in the Game credits for them.

Have you looked at the stats for the model of the Spitfire which you are flying in the demo and timed the climb rate with the real stats for the plane ?
As for the Damage model , you are sure you are using the sim settings ? I experience a great deal of change from the damage. Sometimes its to to point you can't fly the plane and have to bail out, other times the plane take varied degrees of compensation to maintain level flight, depending on the amont of damage done.

Desode

[13th Hsqn Protos]

S~! Desode

I am one of the biggest supporters of what W.o.P can be. However .....

... to say that there is not much difference between W.o.P and IL2 flight models is 100% ridiculous ....... Acceleration/climb aerodynamics ect.... are vastly different.

IL2 is superior in every regard when it comes to physics.

Now you give me IL2 physics with W.o.P graphics and I will drop 100 dollars/euros INSTANTLY. But until then w.o.p is work in progress. Work that is held back by its console roots/community.

Also W.o.P forums are a bloody mess.... and ask yourself if they would ever tolerate a thread like this in their forum ???? Never.


Its a sign of the maturity of the mods/Oleg/ and 1c that this discussion is even allowed to take place here. Thats why we are all still trusting in him. Oleg has BIG respect in all flight sim communities. Don't let the fact that some of us have lovers spats with him occasionally fool you. WERE STILL MARRIED

.
.

[13th Hsqn Protos]

On that note - I think that this thread has served its purpose.

Time to lock it.

Happy New Year to ALL.