Oleg had mentioned earlier on about the possibility of landing, then refueling/rearming/repairs. I think he also mentioned you could get out of the plane and jump into a fresh one...if there was one available.

Dear Oleg.

I'd like to say a very important thing about guncrew on bombers.
There are missions where you want to go stealth, and not to make noisy shots. In IL2 if you want to do so, you have to waste all ammo of guncrew, beeing after that easy to kill if enemy spots you.

I'd like to know if in BoB, player will be able to control the guncrew, giving them orders like strategic games: Attack at will, only attack if attacked, or do not attack anyway. If this isn't planed to be implemented in BoB, i wish you consider the idea. I think this one is a must have control.

Regards

That is very easy to do in IL2: Switch to the gunner-station and disable the automatic control. If you have also disabled the automatic-switch, the gunners will remain silent until you activate them.

I know it's only a workaround and barely useable for larger bombers, but it is a very handy thing for flying a Ju87 or BF110.;)

That's an interesting question, I just read where the guy's that flew with Tommy Maguire said that he flew his P38's so hard that after a while they'd fly sideways because he'd twisted the airframe up so badly. It'd be cool to see this type of effect ingame.

IIRC it was stated that you had the choice to refly in another plane or to refuel and rearm without repairing damage.

We will have fatigue from damage modeled - that was already confirmed. How deep it goes we'll probably see when BoB is released. For now at least it was confirmed that pulling a hard turn with a damaged wing like you do in IL2 will do further damage or rip the wing off. :cool:

Do we know about balistics of bullets how they will be modelled?

In IL2 you can cause as much as damage from a far distance as you do when close (provided that you hit). I think bullet velocity should decrease with distance and dispersion should increase. What about bullet drop?

I'd really like to see that test or the basis on what you make the assumption, that bullet-speed and damage done is not decreased by distance in IL2.

anyway, about that 4.09 release date......... :cool:

Well, I just observe that some guys shoot at large distances > 1500 feet and manage to kill your engine or to punch holes in your wing ...

I'm not sure what type of ammo is being shot at you but a cannon shell could still have lethal velocity (and damage potential) at 450meters (=1500 feet)...

I wonder why he stated distance in feet? You mean yards, perhaps?

Effective Range of a Cal.50HMG is stated with 1800-2000m. That is up to 6000ft and 2200 yards. AFAIK the range of an MG131 is roughly the same.

What does "effective" means ? The bullet reaches the target, the dispersion remains under a given value, the bullet can go through a given width of steel ?

IIRC the Cal.50 bullet in WW2 could penetrate up to 16mm of hardened armor plate at 600m. A while ago I also read a report from Janes about firing special AP-rounds being able to penetrate up to 1 inch of steel-plates at 2000m. It should be noted, though, that these numbers dramatically decrease, if the armor is angled.

The effective range is the distance where it can still be fired aimed and has a high chance of killing a person. Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock, who used a modified M2 HMG in Vietnam for sniping, engaged his enemies at 1500 to 2000m. His record was an aimed shot over 2280m.

You are right, it goes well. Thanks :grin:

I was just wondering since I know that bac in ww2 it was common practice to go as close as practicable. Well, if the cal .50 can penetrate a steel plate from 2000 m ...

could you post a link where I could read this kind of information. It interests me very much. Yet I still would like to know if velocity and altitude drop due to drag and gravity is simulated or not - just by curiosity ...

This guy did a pretty good job putting together some assumptions all based upon data he has collected. As I started to go through his descriptions it seemed to be very logical and well thought out.

He references quite a few documents and books to back up his thoughts...


http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm

It's just a workaround, but I use it a lot, to sneak in and out. Online I also set my bomb-delay to the maximum value. It gives you a little advantage for your escape if you are on a server that reports when targets are hit.

@ 41Sqn_Stormcrow

As I posted, this shot over 2km was with a special AP-Ammo that was AFAIK not available in WW2.

For in formation about the ranges and deflections of Cal.50s I can recommend the book about Carlos Hathcock (German: "Todesfalle"). There are some really stunning reports and a lot of information about tactics and weapons used by snipers in Vietnam and beyond.
Due to his success with the Cal.50, it was further developed as a sniping-ammo and therefore a lot of testing was conducted by the USMC. The tests mentioned are directly from that test. It's been quoted a lot of times. At least I found it after 10 seconds via google.

I'd also like to say that it is not a general rule to get as close to the enemy as possible. It depends a lot on what you are fighting and with what weapons you are engaging. What is true for a 109 against a P51 is not necessarily true for a FW190 with gunpods against a formation of B17s. Remember, effects from cannon-shell explosions are not reduced by range.

Here's some nice data on ammo used, accuracy over distances and penetration values:
http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/i...g/50_ammo.html

Also check out these charts from WW2-testing:
http://img59.exs.cx/img59/919/ap19az.jpg
http://img59.exs.cx/img59/9960/ap23wz.jpg

I thought about posting a link to that, too, but it caused some heated discussion at the Zoo a while ago. I must confess I think it's quite logic, too.

Thanx a lot!

@stormcrow

if you watch the tracer in il2 you see that the ballistic is simulated.

You don't have to copy it due to just IL2 46 could be one of the best ww2 online sims out there if you set it up. Just let them marry it with Armed Assault and Il2 46.. wala you would have one of the best ww2 sims on the markets MMO style .. then RIP WWIIOL.

:cool:

I don't see the Su-26 as just 'proof of concept' or 'Kewl object'.
It is an important inclusion for gaining the interest of those who are mainly orientated toward General Aviation aircraft. There are people who will buy SoW:BoB just for this aircraft knowing Olegs reputation for accurate modelling (look at the price of some third party add-ons for FSX, some cost more than '1946'). More importantly third party devlopers will (probably) use the SoW engine to make GA sims when Oleg releases his third-party tool set allowing aircraft and limited map modelling. This isn't a minor inclusion, it may well lead to GA add-ons that out-sell combat related ones (probably requiring users to buy a SoW title to host the add-ons).
The Su-26 model's performance can be compared to real world aircraft performance. It will prove the accuracy of Olegs modelling, as well as giving him a bench-mark when calibrating amounts of turbulance/wind/buffeting/ground-effect etc. for the game.
The involvement of third parties in making add-on releases (especially General Aviation types) will determine the sucess of the game series IMHO.
It don't think it will take too long after the release of the third party tool-kit before we see a Red Bull air racing add-on.

I still think it's a proof of concept as I suspect MG has a full set of performance data on the Su-26 so it can crosscheck its physics routines against the known data. The use as stunt and air racing plane is a secondary but welcome addition to them. IMO, that is. :)

Myself, I'm longing for watching the effects of MG FF on a Su-26... :P

"Air Race? We ain't flyin no stinkin Air Race here!" <takatakatakatakatakatakatakatakataka>

http://forum.epluribus-unum.de/image...lGrin(DBG).gif

I don't know. It might be kind of fun to have a Reno style pylon race with fully loaded 50 cal's!

Will there be missions for the Lysander? As in dropping life rafts for sea rescue, but especially (maybe later on) dropping off spies and supplies to resistance on the continent?

Hi
I have a wish list for some thinks I would like to see added to IL2 or for bob. Being a keen map builder I’m finding it harder to make map different mission because of the restriction that are in the mission build setting.

Will it be possible to be able to make grass field into rolled grass airfields that you can take of and land from with out having to use the mesh airfield that are in the Il2 game as they have a bad result if you try and taxi off them.

Can all spawn location be marked on the airfields in mission builders and be able to move these spawn points or added.

Can all ambulance have a negative score? This will help to make map were bombing accuracy is important and at present you have to use your own side trucks and they get attacked by the flak and some server will kick you for bombing your own side

At the present the airfield can be attack and damage but they get repaired in a sure time. Is it possible have a run way and taxi way set up as target and have a set time for there repair and get point for this.

Destroyer, aircraft carriers and destroyers, will it be possible to have the gun on those ships be destroyed with out having to sink the ships. This mean that if I bomb or strafe the ship them some of the AA gun should be destroyed. At present all the gun keep firing till the ship is destroyed.

Will it be possible to have a setting so if you chose to that the ship so will not attack ground targets but still attack aircraft to be used as a flak ship?

Be able to Skin stationary aircraft in dog fight missions.

Can RAAF making be added to stationary aircraft list?


Can you build a fly aircraft call a boomerang? It was the only design and built fighter the Australia made.
http://www.aarg.com.au/boomerang.htm

Further to Dux's desires for the Su-26, will the Su-26 have a full damage model?

I'm wondering if the SU 26 will have its ejection seat :cool:

Question about sound and AI in the new game:

Anyone who has been to an airshow I think would agree that an airplane buzzing by you sounds much different than if you were in it.

Given the new ability to man AA guns how good will the sound be for planes taking off buzzing by, and all the sounds of ground crew etc?

Along the line of manning the AA guns will you be able to command people on the ground to re-load ammo or change burned out barrels, how complex will that interaction be if at all?

Oleg, will radio comms between the AI and the player be improved in SoW? Currently, when playing as the flight leader, the AI will just fly off and start attacking an enemy instead of altering the player to the enemy's presence. Often the first hint that the enemy is around is when one of the player's AI mates asks him to clear his tail or that he shot someone down.

Luke, I think I read somewhere in an interview with Oleg that this would appear in the game. It may be in Mysticpuma's interview with Oleg.

Oleg, in the Battle of Britain you may know that farmers and members of the home guard barricaded their fields so that luftwaffe pilots couldn't land there. Unfortunately this wasn't so good for RAF pilots who needed to "prang their kites"! lol:grin:

Will this be modelled in SoW? (sorry if this has been discussed before)

Hello to all and a question.
 

Hi to all. I just signed up to this forum (little late I know) but have been flying the il2 series since the original. Im often seen on hyperlobby and used to be on ubi (with other names), and a total fan of the series. Oh, thank you oleg for making a game of the great fighters of the forgotten front. Much appreciated. Enough of that though. Two factors comprise me, I love the series and dont have much money. Shortly I will be purchasing a new computer (a gateway p-6860fx). My decision may vary but its not the point. What I really want to know is if it will run storm of war. I know this is possibly an impossible question to answer, since it may divulge details of the game, and oleg may not yet be sure. Still, if anyone has any idea Id greatly appreciate their feedback, as I WILL buy the game and I NEED a computer. If its worth anything that computer can run Crysis on high at about 25 fps give or take (yea I know its irrelevant and I dont care much about it but its the heaviest game ever so I use it as an example). Any ideas at all? Either way, thanks!

The "heaviest game ever" runs on a 600Euro PC with high settings.

Since the notebook you want to buy has 4 Gig of RAM, a good CPU and a 8800M GTS you should be able to run Crysis pretty good.

If you want an answer for Storm of War, or at least it's first release: Battle of Britain: Since the Alpha is currently put together nobody knows exactly, including Oleg and his team, how well it will run on a PC or what hardware is needed. He stated a while ago, that the goal is to make BoB run on rather good settings on a PC that runs IL2 at perfect settings. So far, that's all we know.

It'll run it no doubt. The question is how well and at what settings?

@Thunderbolt56

This is obviously a question which can´t be answered until SoW:BoB is released.

Thinking before typing might help to avoid such mishaps.

Sorry, no offense intended, but i couldn´t hold it back.

Magic Eightball says:

http://blog.larrybodine.com/MerchantGould8Ball640.jpg

There will be enough option settings that any decent PC should be able to run BOB SOW at reduced settings with playable frame rates. IF it doesn't they are in for a terrible hurt on sales and bad press in the forums. I will be upgrading my PC's many times during the life of the SOW series to max out the experience as features are added. Those who could care less about eye-candy and other features can set options required to plaud along with an average system.

Not sure if this question was asked already but please could we have crewed planes instead of ghost planes? That is put crew members including pilot in it? It looks so ghostly when sitting in a two seat cockpit (and looks bad in IL2 movies).

A bit more chatter among crew members would be great, too.

Thats all I needed to know, thanks. I will be replacing the laptop in like 2 years, so by then it wont matter how heavy bob is. I just want to make sure it will run it as its first realease, dont feel like being left in the dust. Another question, I think I know, but since it keeps changing, what is the (current) release date? And yes, I know "all release dates are subject to change" "all release dates will be changed";)
Thanks again.

Computer specs
 

Asking what game system will run on is pointless.
After the Alpha stage they begin beta testing which takes many months. During the beta testing many incarnations are made, ideas improved, discarded etc.
Once all the above has been done and they are happy with the basic project they start optimising the game to run on the lowest machine it can.
This also takes into account current drivers from the big two GPU card manufacturers.
This optimisation goes on even after the product has gone gold and really never ends.
Features will be added as the various phazes of SOW are introduced.
Each new feature will require more bang for your buck.
The orginal Il2 ran on perfect settings on my ATI 9550 many moons ago.
Now I have a 8800gt and the current incarnation IL2 1946 runs fine on perfect settings except i am now running it on 1440 x 900 resolution where as on my ATI the settings were 1024 x 768. If I tried to run Il2 1946 on my old ATI system I doubt I could even get medium settings.
So moral of the story, wait be patient and you will find out when it hit's the shelves.
Until then buy whatever you need to play what you want to. Oleg has proved in the past that he makes his games perform well on low end machines.
Try flying Lomac (Lock-On Flaming Cliffs) and you will realise how backward some flight-sim code is.
On my not-so uber system i am at stages reduced to flying on medium settings and that sim is over three or four years old :grin:

I have a question regarding servers:

Will there be a better or mo usable server interface for SoW? Like a web interface or GUI console? Will there be a dedicated co-op server as well?

109, will it evolve in campaign?
 

The E1 saw service as did the E3 and E4. Will the progression of the 109 be modeled into the offline and online campaigns?
For example the E-3 was replaced by the E-4 (with many airframes being upgraded to E-4 standards starting at beginning of the Battle of Britain) which was different in some small details, most notably by the modified MG-FF/M wing cannon and by improved head armor for the pilot.
The starting at the beginning of the battle would indicate that squadrons may have been upgrade as the battle continued??? And as the modified MG-FF/M wing cannon had more explosive power than the E3's standard modified MG-FF wing cannon it would impact heavily on the realism of the sim.
I am sure you have more important things to worry about right now but when you have the time, I was just wondering?

Dear (уважаемый) Oleg!
Keeping in mind last initiatives of NVIDIA and ATI on physics acceleration by means of G280 and R700 what can we expect:
improved craft effects (flame, exhaust);
improved combat effects (bursts with numerous particles, smoke);
improved weather effects (mist, rain)
AND CAN this initiatives REALLY INCREASE FPS as applied to BOB?
With best regards and respect to your great work, Nemo

I'm not sure if my question is original, but I'd like to ask Oleg whether or not stereo video mode will be fully supported in SoW? Almost all of modern games can be runned in stereo mode, but if those games r not developed for it, u will have some small but irritating problems for example with aiming. The only thing is needed is that all the inscriptions appearing on screen wouldn't be affected by stereo splitting and the last: when player "sticks to aim" he should see the sight-cross only with one eye, it's quite easy!

If I recall correctly, from past discussions here on the forum, there was a mixture of production-line/upgraded aircraft in the squadrons, which in turn produced a variety of intermediate forms.

If SoW:BoB support mixing of different types of aircraft in the same flight (ie. having a Bf-109 as the wingman to a Bf-110), then the new tools could easily allow the 3rd party to create more variants.

I seem to remeber that sometime in the past Luthier has indicated that this is so.

another one; during the summer of 1940 the Uboats had their first happy era. will the sinking of ships in the Atlantic lead to less fuel (or other things) available?

just a reminder, another month has past, perhaps we'll see some new pictures soon

Just a request for SOW...

I don't think this as been ask before so here it goes.

Presently we only have one stick setup profile available in game. If someone want to change profile he has to drop of game, select a new profile (swaping files or manually changing setting) and come back in again. Could it be possible to have multiple stick setup available. Maybe a stick setup that is link to a plane type/variant that could be selected when you choose your plane. The way I picture this:

A) In a control menu like we have now in iL2, have the option to select the plane for which we want to edit the stick controls (pitch, yaw, roll, etc.) (i.e.: Spit Mk1);

B) Have the option to edit one or more "user defined/pilot" stick setup profile(s) were one could enter is prefered value for stick sensitivity, filtering, limits (kind of what we have now with iL2 (but maybe more detailed));

C) Have the option to link the plane (Spit Mk1) to either a "default" profile or to the edited "user defined/pilot" profile so that each time that this plane is selected in game the proper stick setup "file" is loaded;

D) Give the option to edit the "default" stick setup that is applicable to all plane. This "default" stick profile would be more of a universal stick profile that is applicable to all planes rather then a profile the you can't edit. It would be loaded by "default" unless the user as choosen to have a custom (or edited) profile link the the given plane (in this example the Spit Mk1).This would give us greater flexibility and would help alot as different plane sometime need very different stick setup (in terms of sensitivity, filtering, limits).

So to recap this would allows us to customize a general profile (default profile) available to all planes... And fine tune some profiles that are specific to planes that we fly most often. Also being having them link to a plane means that when you change plane (i.e. a Spit Mk1 for a BF109-E3/4) in a server (or campain) your stick profiles get automatically switched without you having to do anything. Most importantly you don't have to drop out of the game.

If one was to push this idea further, all controls could be specific to given aircraft (made to work in a similar fashion to what was explained above)... not just the stick basic 3 axis. This could help guys that fly single, twin or four engine aircraft from the same setup.

Hope this help,

Well Luthier apologized for not communicating with us more often and promised regular updates/news etc. Its been a month since then so i would expect to hear something soon, but then again.......:confused:

Hi 1c team/Oleg,

Would it be possible in BoB SOW to have active front lines in dogfight/coop missions, where mission targets are achieved and the front lines actively move during the mission to indicated captured/lost territory.

This would/could work along side the "triggers" that will be a feature in mission building then win loss scenario missions made by the host can be used instead of the limited/overcomplicated campaign engines currently present, that control the map results from the log output file.

At the moment the "Red/Blue Won" needs an overhaul but nothing as complicated as the Dgen Ngen or Lowengrins DCG.

Cheers

The mission victory parameters as they are currently are not coded by 1:C. Rather they are added programs that individual servers run in the background (FBDaemon and ServerCommander). Having an in-game programmability like this would definitely be cool and, at this point, it is a rarity to fly on any online server that doesn't run one of these. I'd like to see it added too with some more real-time dynamic capability...and moving vehicles/ships.

Hmm you miss the point methinks.

FB Deamon and IL2SC are just dedicated server GUI's.

Im asking 1c to use the triggers they have planned for BoB mission building to incorporate moving front lines during the mission all this means is the front line markers get an AI ability to move when set triggers mission events occur, and not using Ngen Dgen DCG to compile the next map from the log file output.

This could include airfields becoming active for either side as territory is captured, and in df servers timeout on af's so you can land rearm closer to the action once mission parameters are met.

So active real time front lines first for me please :)



Cheers

E3 will SOW be there?
 

Just a simple question :grin:

Yes!

Macchi fighters
 

Hi guys, i don't know if Macchi planes will be included in new SoW, if yes do you need material about them ?, what kind of materials do you need ?,

Pls tell me what you need, i can ask in AerMacchi directly if possible to give you informations, pictures, scheme etc about these plane.

Ciao
Massimo "JG52_Wolfen"

Luthier have you forgotten how to communicate again? You did say you would drop by every 2 weeks or so.:rolleyes:

I don't remember him saying this, in fact he rather said things like that :

"There's really no point in bickering at this point. Work is ongoing. The proof will be in the pudding. I can write here back and forth for hours, but it'll just be rehashing the same old points. We have nothing to do with the console game. Oleg's team is working as hard as they can. The game is extremely complex, and I would even say it's much more revolutionary than Il-2 was in its day. And It'll come out when it's ready."

"You don't need to apologise, we know exactly how you guys feel, and it's us who really should be apologising for keeping you in the dark. I mean, I wish we could release shots and videos and stuff, it's just we're not at that point yet. So we've all just gotta hold on.
Trust me, everyone on this side is as interestng in releasing this sim as any of you in playing it. It just takes time."

"The problem with work in progress is that it's a work in progress. Things are released when they're ready. What possible reason do you think can anyone have to withold things? Alpha screenshots aren't shown at this time because they're alpha screenshots. A sim is a huge number of different components, which all need to come together in the end. Look up some shots from IL-2 alpha and compare them to release shots for a rough comparison. They look like two completely different sims. And the situation today is different than in the pre-Il-2 days. Even though some of you may feel different, it makes little sense to release things that may be unrepresentative of the final result right now - especially after so long a wait.
When things are ready, of course we'll be happy to share them with you. I've been roaming around Oleg's office all this week (and they worked all day Saturday too), and if I can get some of you to take my word for it, things are looking great. There's a crazy amount of really exciting things being done, things never even attempted by anyone before. The sim, on virtually every level, is head and shoulders above everything else.
Oleg and team are trying to build a benchmark sim for many years to come. This is why it's taking a long time. Il-2 lasted all these years because the initial work put into it was solid. Same thing is being done here. Making a masterpiece is hard back-breaking work.
I know it's hard to remain patient in the dark, but what can I say, things will be ready when they're ready.
As we get closer to release, Oleg promises to release more things more often, just as the case was eight years ago, as we were approaching the release of the original Il-2."

Good answer Krasno ;)

He also said this but we have not heard from him yet. Is that a good answer or what Tata.

"Listen guys, you don't have to apologise or explain anything. I understand exactly how you feel. There's been a break in communication, so this is a natural development. We need to work better on communicating with you guys. It takes a while to (re)-establish rapport. I can't speak for Oleg, but I personally will try to communicate more, and hopefully after a while we'll all be on the same page."
Can't see the words "two weeks", nor any promise.

"Listen guys, you don't have to apologise or explain anything. I understand exactly how you feel. There's been a break in communication, so this is a natural development. We need to work better on communicating with you guys. It takes a while to (re)-establish rapport. I can't speak for Oleg, but I personally will try to communicate more, and hopefully after a while we'll all be on the same page."
Can't see the words "two weeks", nor any promise.

See two weeks anywhere ?
He says there have been a break, and he give reasons : there is nothing to say, but "we work hard".
End on this topic.

Look, guys, calm down.

Oleg has made one statement that didn't turn out true for the Il-2 series (but which will eventually be realised in Bob). So, his statement about always delivering is almost 100% correct. On the other hand Luthier predict two or three features that didn't turn out, and thus, is about half as reliable as Oleg but still more reliable than 99% of us. Furthermore, Luthier never stated that he will always deliver on what he says.

Finally, to my knowledge, he never said he would give us lots of updates & really soon & that they would fulfil all our wildest fantasys & that these updates would include a flyable demo &... All that he said was that he would try to improve communications and keep in touch with the community.

My recommendation: Find something else to do. There are plenty of things out there including people & trees & books &...

E3 up and running
 

Yet still no word on Storm of War from either Ubisift, 1C Company or Maddox Games?
Anyone heard anything yet, was expecting at least a stall or even a new mention by the big guns :grin:

Any chance of using vista 64 bit architecture, so we can access full 8 Gig memory on next rev?

Thanks.
Ian Fraser

64 bit vist architecture 8 Gig memory access
 

Any Chance we will be able to use 64 bit version of vista? So we can access a full 8 Gig of memory.

Thanks

Ian

And Ubisoft stay mum...
For a product with a September 2008 release date according to IGN, the silence speaks volumes...
Lets reset the clocks for a September 2009 release.
For crying out loud ubisoft are boasting about their tweenie girlz game range and cannot even throw us flight simmers a bone?

My friend is a senior buyer at a big gaming store in the UK called 'Game', he was invited to a Gaming Convention and had a meetings with several folk from Ubisoft, he asked them about Storm Of War and how it was coming along, he said they just looked at him blankly as none of them had ever heard of it!!:confused:

Here comes the people freaking-out... :)

It's not about people freaking out, its just Oleg announced that 4.09 was on hold until a major milestone was achieved in SOW.
Since then we here nothing which is no surprise.
But E3 is where the latest to be released, near to be released and top products are advertised to the industry.
The fact the SOW did not even feature in the Ubisoft presentation means one has to have serious doubts they are still the publisher.
Or if they are, they definately are not prepared to put their name on it just yet.
That brings us back to when and if the product will be released.
If Ubisoft say nothing and they are the publisher then it definately will not be coming out this year or early next year or they would have punted the game to retailers and fundi's at E3 for the free press and marketing.
If they are not the publishers then we have to ask, now what?

If SOW is still over a year away then for crying-out loud finish off 4.09.
Some of us are not so young, hell the way this product is extending it's release date I expect my grandchildren to be playing it :grin:

Some news, any news would be better than development shots or pictures of planes, no matter how good.

As for not wanting to give too much away becausae the competition might one up us, well that is nonsence. Name me any manufacturer other than Maddox doing a realsitic WW2 flight sim or that has one in even early development? There are none.
So am I freaked out about nothing, most likely yes, but then I am tired of reading "We are so busy we cannot spare the people to work on 4.09 rubbish" when in game development terms SOW may be nothing more than in pre alpha stage. and at least a year or two away from release :grin:

Give us 4.09 with a dedicated server software and take your own sweet time with SOW.
Damn this year i was really hoping :(:(:(

Im not freaking out buddy, i am just posting what i was told, this information is not trying to suggest that SOW is not happening, however it does suggest to me though that its not going to happen any time soon. Obviously if some of the UBI guys who are selling their latest products have not heard of SOW then it would appear the sim is some way off.

?????

SoW is not presented on E3 2008.

I think the pressures to complete BOB are so great that they arn't entertaining any thoughts of completing the free 4.09 patch at this time. So relax, eat right, get your blood pressure down, and you may survive to fly 4.09. Of course when BOB SOW is released many will have no interest in a IL-2 patch. ;)

Well I for one could not care less about 4.09... just let the MODDER have there fun... Oleg and crew can keep all their energy focused on BOB as far as I`m concerned. This sim had a good run but its time for iL2 to roll over and die... and let the new kid on the block take over... Hell a new franchise means fresh cash coming in... no sence spending money on a dying horse... let it die...

Any of you went to business school? From a lot of posts on here I would guess not...

I love freedom of speech don`t you...

I never said you where freaking out.

Thanks for stepping in Nike-IT, that was very timely :)

+1 :cool:

- 1

A new franchise? Yes when it arrives it will be a cash cow, but until then?

I see the official/unofficial release date has been extended again into 1st Quarter 2009 :grin: Now even if you didn't go to business school you would consider that a bad thing.
But as you went to business school oh wise one please, a product months if not years past its first official release date would be called? Vapourware? Long live Duke Nukem Forever :grin:
Just kidding, we all know its coming, Oleg promised and thats good enough for me :rolleyes:

Just the fact that you are all still hanging here and biatch at every chance you get means that you will poney up the $$$ when BOB comes out to buy it... So no arm done as far as 1C is concerned...

Let me tell you a little secret from a VERY WISE guy that did go to business school.... its how you decide if you go forward or not with an investment (or project)... from a financial point of view... its what we call NPV (net present value) analysis... This means that AS OF RIGHT NOW... if the cost of completing BOB is 1$ less then the present value of all future benefit expected to accrue to 1C... BOB goes forward... If not you shut the mother down... Its as simple as that...

As you can see... the further you are down the road... the less costs you have to incure to finish the product hence less chance of it being canceled... Its just BASIC finance. Past costs ARE NOT RELEVANT. Hope you enjoyed this little finance 101 course.

Technicall problem are another issue all together though...

Just found all these release dates, it is amazing where do they get these from, surely they dont just pluck them out of the air? :):)


http://www.gamershell.com/news_30305.html
http://il2mdb.montydan.com/the-storm-of-war-trailer
http://uk.pc.ign.com/objects/827/827819.html
http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/sim/stormo...ain/index.html
http://www.tothegame.com/pc-5590-sto...in-for-pc.html
http://www.metacritic.com/games/plat...rbattlebritain
http://www.gogamer.com/Storm-of-War-...VVviewprod.htm
http://www.gamestats.com/objects/827/827819/
http://videogames.barnesandnoble.com.../2000003130689
http://www.gamedaily.com/games/storm...ame-main/list/
http://www.2404.org/news/912/Storm-o...ally-announced
http://www.allgame.com/cg/agg.dll?p=agg&sql=1:50756

@Tree_UK

and why not????

it´s easier and more popular to proclaim: i know ..... , even if its pure inspiration, then to say: i have no clue.

even pure fiction might become reality by accident.

Well if you can't dazzle them brilliance, baffle them with BS..and it works :lol:

Question for Oleg...............

For home pit builders SOW needs two things IL2-1946 does not have.

1) Option gun sight, nose and propeller view. In IL2-1946 the F1 key toggles the options of Cockpit, no cockpit etc. But those who are sitting in a physical (or home made) cockpit need only to see the gun sight, the nose of the aircraft, wings and the propeller, where the instrument panel and floor normally are should just be blacked out when looking down. And this view needs to have its own keystroke command to activate it (no toggle from one view to the next).

2) Physical Instrument \ gauge compatibility.

There are more and more people these days taking flight simulation to the next level, building pits around thier favorite sim. IL2 and SOW are hands down the best flight sims available with the exception of the fore mentioned!

FSX has made these features available, I believe it is the EXTRA 3005 that has the nose and prop view and pysical instruments are readable by the ms sim.

Oleg, will you, or have you considered these options for pit-builders?

for more info....http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=3613

@windturbin

for your No. 1: You do know that this option is only usable for offline play? Otherwise it must be restricted to "no cockpit" - server and then the people with the home-cockpit will have the disadvantage.

Some questions for Oleg
I am sure you are bored with answering the same questions over and over again, so I hope these have not been asked before.

Will the distances flown in the real Battle of Britain be modeled? Or will the map be a small version of the real thing?

Will SOW BoB be released with a ready made online campaign similar to or incorporating aspects of either ADW or warbirds of prey or both?

Il2 Commander and programs like it were created to deal with the online needs of the community. Will SOW already have such an interface program on release or is it expected that third party developers will create it?

In later incarnations of Il2, cockpits could open etc. Will this feature be available on all plane types in SOW. Will I be able so slide open windows on bombers (ones that could historically be opened in-flight of course)? Reverting back to the opening of cockpits, will sound change, currently whether I open the cockpit on a Hellcat or not it makes no difference. There is no change in sound, wind blasting in, louder engine noise etc.
I am not sure if the increased drag is modeled either in Il2, which brings me to my last question, will drag caused by wind-resistance either by open cockpits or plane damage be modeled.

Thanks in advance

Both 1C Publishing EU and Ubisoft will be at the Games Convention in Leipzig this august, so there might be hope to see something.

Bug with IL2 408
 

I don't know if this is already posted somewhere. Unfortunately I haven't seen a bug dedicated thread either. So apologees if I am wrong in this section.

Me and some others have to report a bug that seems to happen particularly on a few new maps like Kiew or the new dessert map. I don't know if other maps are concerned or if the maps are the reason for it.

Up to now this bug hasn't happened to me offline but then I am mostly an online flyer.

The bug is when you're on a map somewhere playing. Suddenly the mission transfer screen appears. No way to return to the current game. One has to stop the mission and the game.

It would be nice if this bug could be fixed with the next Patch.

Request for Oleg
 

I have one request for Oleg and devs, would you please give Server side controls to set Default markings in SOW. Yes, I realise that it will be just the BoB in the first installment but it's concievable that should other countries markings show up later we will have people choosing something other than the correct markings for the theatre. This is already kind of a problem in full real servers, so if it can be locked by the server to have only Brit marks on Brit planes and so on it will make Server-admins job easier.

Yes and this could be made per plane type... say Spits - British... P51s - USAF... etc...

First have to agree with trying to keep a pleasant atmosphere by respecting eachother and giving due considerations. This is just part of being an adult or at least something I was brought up to believe.

Anyway on to my question. I have heard rumors of an Improved version of IL2 1946 in the works. If so maybe they're working on compatibility issues. I hope they plan on adding more planes and Campaigns such as BOE, The Last Days, Return to Honor, maybe even an Aleutian Campaign as well as adding missions for the P-36 at Pearl Harbor. After all they did participate thereby earning recognition.

There's another issue that I hoped they'd look into...

In CFS2 you don't have to fly the default aircraft you can select one from your hanger and play a customized "what if" scenario. I like to play the role of combat test pilot lending a hand in different campaigns while evaluating aircraft combat performance for the developers. For example: I selected a Spitfire MkIXc during Battle of Poland even though it was well advanced aircraft it was pitted against overwhelming numbers which made a better test through actual battle conditions. Sometimes I'd steal advanced Enemy Fighters. Anyway there's a lot of directions one can go with this game. If you find out anything let me know via email: scooby200245601@yahoo.com

Thanks, tim

Management of air movement :)
 

Hello Dear Oleg!!!
I have a lot of questions... but i try to be brief... And to be limited all in pair...
From your last answers it became known that the Life in air station will be more saturate ... I mean also occurrence of planes not on a strip and in formation
, and respawn on parking/in hangars...
As hearings go as people will be present in air station... Mechanics/refuellers...In general the ground personnel from Battalion of Air field maintenance (БАО)...
Here in connection with revival of a life in air station I had a question... And whether will be Red and Green Rockets... Resolving Take off or landing?... Very often happens that coming back after suicide mission on Il2...going to landing and already on, up to automatism to the fulfilled scheme, You make landing approach...
And here like already now should contact with grounds... but no!!!... There was a chassis from for damages has not left.... And here impact.. The screw in a spiral..., etc... And if during this moment the red rocket, warning about that landing gear has not left.. Then gas in a floor.. And leaving on a following circle... I understand that if with a green rocket on start to understand simply enough... That with Red rockets will be more complex... As well as with Signallers on Aircraft carriers...
And from here a following question... In the some Simulator are present Aviadispatchers... If I am not mistaken in series MSFS they are... the workplace of the Dispatcher is represented... And it supervises over flights... In fact in SoW it can be too...And even it is very necessary ... And in Online especially... We shall tell the observant tower Is represented... In sense the camera on this tower... And at the person which there to be, have binocular ... And that opportunity... by press buttons in air Fly up red or green rockets
... It is possible to supervise over take off/landing...
For Online it is especially actual, sometimes happens terrible accident at take off or at landing...
For example Pilot which have brought down, could push on this tower.. Instead of to throw out from a server... Though employment honourable in my opinion and as punishment is not has gone... And if we shall tell to it to fasten an opportunity of inclusion and deenergizing of illumination of a landing strip and illumination in air station... in night time...


Time Probably will operated anti-aircraft artillery
... That why to not be such?...



( Excuse me for my English...And if it was more than once discussed )

Dont hold your breath for a reply! :)

I breathe deep as i can :D
if it was told to me ...

That is totally unfair, of cource there will be a reply. Just not one from Oleg :rolleyes:

Me thinks he is busy doing what developers do when they have nothing new to report :grin:

My guess is this entales staring blankly at the monitor and mumbling "Tree must die" forms part of this process, that and compiling hit lists of everyone named "Tree" in the UK :)

So relax and wait for all the answers to roll in. My guess is it will be done in 'Two Weeks';)

2 weeks sounds good! :):)

I Think if someone teamkills in an online game they have to sit out and man the flac or aaa etc. But just in case people enjoy it, give them the option to select those when choosing aircraft...

Thanks for a great game..... ~S~