We plan with transfer into real battle, right from the training.
Already told too much.... Because it isn't done yet. Basis in code is done, but in plan the development of training is more later. How much will go in final - we will see.
The basis(basis code) of Training is almost done, but there should be creating of screens, missions and speeches/texts of teacher. I can tell only that we put there some features, that never was done in history of fligth sims. Realistic in a code and useful for real training, like in real military flight school.
I only would repeat. We created the basis in code, but not final taining.

In IL-2 there were some limitations due to the original engine design.

Now I wonder, after the BoB is released, which parts of the engine will be "out-of-discussion" to be amended?

I know it's difficult to tell 100%, but maybe you can give us a rough idea of what's to be "locked" as soon as the game is released.

Thanks Oleg, exactly what I liked to know and I'm very satisfied by the options you'll provide us with.

1. There will be a complete lock on all changes to the core code. Especially for basic online engine.
The code will be open to external additional modules, for inclusion of new any ground objects or planes flyable or AI. New campaign engines and other possible programs. Basically open interface for many things. Even game menu is designed for such future additions.
2. A tool for such models to be inserted into the engine
3. A tool for non programming, but tuning of aircraft behavior (all data neccessary for FM of that aircraft. You simply put digits and move sliders.)
4. Some 3D models as a basis for learning or rework by third party.
5. Probably totally or partially open code for the programming of cockpits and animations of aircraft details.
6. Editor of maps. Allow to create maps from users made textures, etc. The map will be limited in size. Unlimited in size maps editor - only by a license for third party with agreement.


That isn't a final decision. So maybe some changes in one or other side.

Notice about online gameplay:

All new Aircraft or player-controlable content may not be included in our core online gameplay set without our certification and agreement with third party developer.
In all other cases such content you may play in a single play or probably online on specially created servers, that are not certified (updated in code) by us.
This is the general idea how to escape online cheaters and don't damage fair online gameplay.

To clarify. Let's take the Spitfire for example. Its FM will be completely locked in the "core" set. You will then be able to create your own Spitfire version with our tools, with tuned FM parameters, etc, let's call it the SuperSpit. You'll be able to use the SuperSpit offline whenever you like. When you join an online server with the "core lock" enabled, you won't be able to fly the SuperSpit. You'll only be able to fly our stock Spitfire with all parameters unmodified. Alternatively, when you join a server with no core lock, you'll be able to fly your SuperSpit, or the regular Spitfire, whichever you prefer.
Same goes for all other changes that we'll allow through our user tools.

Attention:

Items 2,3,5 and 6 will be released some time after the relase. We will take time to make user friendly interface and manuals. At the moment the goal it to finish BoB itself and we can't make all things in parallel process. We have just some basis that we using ourselves with totally open source code that all time in changes. its why we can't release many things right with the BoB release.


PS. this post a bit edited by Ilya Shevchenko that to make clear my Olegish English :)

WOW, I'm impressed by the last reply!!!
And as far as I can understand, actually there won't be any engine limitations for you. Meaning, that whatever you want to change, you'll be able to do it (not like the IL-2 maps, for example, which could not be worked after the final release).
This is very promising and thank you for letting us know!!!

Limitation is always present:
1. Time
2. Money for additional development.

will bullet holes be visable on ground targets such as barrels, buildings, etc?

I can say that they will be visible on aircraft.
But can't say now about such target as buildings.

Oleg, thank you very much for all your answers! One question concerning clickable cockpits:

If a 3rd party wants to model clickable cockpits for the aircraft, could those be used online in the Maddox-Approved mode of SoW?

I can't say it now. The code isn't finished in this part.

However I'm sure that these that will use clicable will have disadvantage in control speed :).

1) Can't do much about this since it is a "constant" :)

2) We exchanged an email on this years ago; perhaps you remember... I really think there is a segment of users out there in the community like myself that would pay over $100 dollars for "premium user package" that would include additional tweaks or modules that are locked and not provided to all users... Perhaps some advanced flight modeling, tweaked graphical features, etc... I know add-ons can address these needs, but you have such a personal following and people who know sims know you give quality and would be willing to pay more with your stamp of approval. At the very least, I hope you're getting a good kickback % on the add-ons that are produced for SOW. The whole flight sim business model should be different than shooters... Not sure it can withstand a high price for all users, but to make up for lack of total users, price needs to be higher...

In general, it seems shooter folks are starting to get bored of the cheap/fast thrill of shooters and are looking for substance. Perhaps in the coming years, we'll see a ressurgence of interest in simming like there was in the early/mid 80s with the original MS FS which "every" gamer had in there PC collection.

Hope you succeed... IL-2 is still fantastic after all these years... Funny to think we all may be playing SOW + add-ons 20+ years from now...!

There is one good method, which I use in DCS: Black Shark. I have programmed one button of my HOTAS to act like left mouse button and I always move mouse cursor to the bottom center part of the screen, so that it is visible, but not interfering with important things. When I look around with TrackIR, camera moves and so mouse cursor moves (in relation to cockpit) also. I can point mouse cursor where I need by using head and then click things by using my HOTAS. This method is very fast. I even enter coordinates into NAV system by using this method.

Of course, using mouse to switch/use stuff which has to be switched/used without looking at it (like flaps/trimer wheel) in fighter is strange, however I think that things like radio, gear are ok for "mouse" interaction.

Sorry, it seems it is missed by me.

It is already working. On 2 or 3 monitors.

Oleg Hi.

One quick question again from my side: is MAX map size, that users will be able to create themselves already fixed or not yet?

Not defined yet. Probably it will be limited in square (km2) but not fixed by constant sides.

I hear you.

Hello Oleg,

1) Regarding speech files and mission editor : will the creator of a mission/campaing be able to insert various user-made speech files following a particular campaign storyline ? This would add a lot to immersion.
2) If yes, could that feature be coupled with triggers on multiple stages (following an if...then structure) ?
3) If not, would you consider the idea ?


Thank you.

Hi Oleg,

Curious about AI behaviour:

-Will AI fly to home base when (slightly) damaged?
-Will AI see trees + other obstacles during emergency landing?
-Will AI switch from target when that other one is more favourable?
-Will AI fly home when out of ammo?
-Will AI try to fly home in a very disadvantageous situation?
-Will AI avoid places/airfields with lot of AAA?

Hi Oleg,
First time for me in this forum.
I'm definitly surprised by the quality of your simulator. I'm in the real life a flight instructor and it's amazing to see how it's easy to teach to people who already plays on IL2. I also recomend this sim for all of my students.
If you need some help for the training program in SOW, tell me, it gonna be a great pleasure for me.

Why clickable cockpits, there are awesome button command tools available that are a hundred times easier than trying to look around the virtual cockpit to click in a precise place on the screen to raise the flaps in increments, etc.

Clickable cockpits are archaic, haven't made sense in 10 years. We have all kinds of options with joysticks, throttles, controller panels and switch blocks now.

I have an MFP as per below. It has 25 keys that are highly programmable furnished with the basic unit. In addition it has two selectable modes, which allows an additional 25 key commands (which can be scripts as well). You can arrange the keys in any configuration with templates. You can make your own templates and print them out. This is so much more efficient than clickable cockpits.

Clickable cockpits might work for some in MSFT Flight simulator, because everything in flight simulation is procedural and not time critical for the most part. Air combat is on the fly, at speed under pressure. finding the flaps when you doing a high G turn to click just enough for combat flaps, and you've got an FW190 pouring rounds at your six. Then when you're just about done turning you have to find the virtual switch to raise the flaps. LOL --- this is not a best way to do anything.

http://www.chproducts.com/retail/mfp.html

It cost 199$ US.

You can also buy X-Keys with all kinds of interface options

http://www.xkeys.com/

If you are so set on clickable cockpits you might want to check out some fo the cockpits people have made for flight and air combat simulators. They all use controller tools. Some of the serious Falcon 4.0 enthusiats will blow your mind with what they do.

More polys. Generally speaking ... I am very pleased with planes and cockpits. IF possible (due to time) would like to see more polys in objects ..... but these can be inserted later under modded content.

Please make sure pilot head is moveable as in example.. Lock On.

I agree. However i would like to see both, clickable cockpit and buttons commands. It ll be amazing see switches moving when you press a button, and pilot hands on coms to hehe :o

Hehe... Would like too see some guys complaining, some planes has no "trasmitters". Ex.: Japanese and Russian fighters. It ll be a bad experience fly without radios or with interference.

This can afford new strategies, like to bomb radio stations to break enemy coms. hehe... Would be amazing!

OK, this has been asked before by someone else and it was answered but, quite honestly, I didn't understand the answer that was given.

I'm wondering what's with the floating antenna shadows? They are disconnected and makes it look like the antenna mount is floating

Also the dotted shadow of the antenna wire itself, is this part of how the engine displays shadows for wires? does it have something to do with the fact it is a still image, or is it just WIP?

If I missed something can someone please explain it to me.

That's very cool Mhondoz, will that also work for a G13?

Totally against clickable cockpits here. It's a nice feature to use a couple of times on start up f ex, afterwards it becomes just annoying in a combat sim.

If a third party offer's it, I will buy it. I'm not talking the mouse, but programed keys:grin:

The things said about in-game training, user customizations, and the third party tools are just as I imagined they should be - truly innovative not just for the genre but for gaming, cant wait to see where the SoW engine leads us throughout the next decade.

As I was reading the post I was thinking to myself "What did Oleg copy and paste this from something?" Then I got to the above part and had a good laugh. It's nice when Ilya comes along to clarify things, but we really feel at home with your "Olegish". Besides it's half the fun. :)

Compared to all other ground objects the boats I've seen so far have faces enough IMHO.

These images:

http://fooblog.mexxoft.com/wp-content/bf-108b-2_04.jpg
http://fooblog.mexxoft.com/wp-conten...k_1_wip_01.jpg

make me wonder as to the customization of ground objects. Will we, for instance, be able to place aircraft that have their cowling removed for maintnence, or interceptors with their canopies open and ready for pilots at the start of missions?



EDIT:

One thing in the answers so far does concern me though: the mention of limitations on map sizes in km^2. While in general I love this, as it makes the game more DF friendly, it makes me worried on the 'Battle of the Atlantic' front. With limited map sizes, we won't be able to do long maritime patrols or convoy interceptions.

Also, a friend of mine mentioned naval B-24 variants, and this got me wondering: while I'm guessing that in plane radar will be possible, will aircraft searchlights be possible?

...which brings up the question of sub-surface warfare. Are depth charges going to me modeled in game as usable weapons from aircraft? And will maritime patrol aircraft be able to vector in submarines to a convoy, and then hear/see about the results? (obviously, the visual would only be if they were lucky enough to have a submarine nearby in the first place). This could also be used the other way around, by fighters seeing a Fw-200 or uboat, and vectoring ships away.

But do you think long maritime patrols will be of interrest to more than only a very small number of people?
There will be virtually no aerial opposition, just MANY hours of empty ocean, with an odd ship now and then. And maybe a (about one in every 100 patrol or so) german submarine. I think incorporating this gives very little value for the time spent on creating it.
There will probably be enough ship targets if you fly a Stuka over the Channel. And that is well within the map for BoB.

Skarphol

NeoqB guys have so many things to learn from you....currently on some rigs (even on new i7 quad cores!) ROF is not playable as one will expect to be on a new i7 (sometimes heavy microstutters both online and offline, slowdowns when AI planes are near, very often we have a problem with online authentication for online and ofline play etc etc )...they have a problem with optimisation of the sim (Can you help them?...OK Im just kiddin :-) )...

and you are aware how optimisation is important in developing of a modern sim..thank you for that.....

question for you: What do you think, would my i7 920 quad overclocked to 3.3Ghz cope with BOB: SOW? Would SOW run smoothly on this cpu?

cheers

Map Km2 Limitation
 

As far as I've understood, the acreage limitation will regard only the user created maps. No limitations foreseen for the third party authorised licensees.

Ins

Hi Oleg

Can I PM you about a UK TV programme which might be able to use your visuals and help promote BoB SoW?

Cheers

PPanPan

Thanks AdMan :)

I have never tested it with the G13, so I don't know. But from what I can see of information from Logitech, applets written for the G15 should also run on G13, so there is a chance it would work.

waiting for the post of my friend Ilya
I hope will be a Bf 110 or a Hurricane cockpit.
Bf 109 cockpit too

wow Oleg, you "made my week" if you have included this already in BoB !

to make sure i havnt misunderstood you, you are confirming we will be able to use in BoB at the same time:

1) a central widescreen lcd monitor (for ex a 22', 25' or 27' lcd monitor)
2) together with two smaller size lcd's at the same time on each side next to it, to increase our peripheral vision, and those extra monitors could be a smaller size, like 17' or 19' lcd's for example in landscape mode ?
3) we will be able to use the BoB 3 monitor "mixed size lcd" setup without needing to use a matrox 3H2go unit or a software program like ultramon or soft3H

note 1: this is probably needing some different programming compared to what is needed for using 3x the exact same monitor size, like some other games allow 3x the same 22', or 3x the same 25' lcd's (some current games that allow 3x monitors do not allow a mix of monitor sizes)

note 2: if in BoB we then use for ex a central 24 or 27' (resolution 1920 x 1200 = 2.304.000 pixels) with a 19' lcd in landscape mode on each side (resolution 1280 x 1024 = 1.310.720 pixels, but for both 19' lcd used this is x 2 so = 2.621.440 pixels)
- then our pc grafix card gpu's will in this setup "only" need to push 2.304.000 pixels (for the 24' lcd) + 2.621.440 pixels (for the two 19' lcd's in landscape mode) = 4.925.440 pixels in total ? (and not 3x 2.304.000 pixels = 6.912.000 pixels as you would need for 3x 24' lcd's)

it is much cheaper for us to be able to mix monitor sizes like that (because we can use older cheap lcd's which many of us already have), and our grafix cards do not need to be ultra powerfull and ultra expensive (pushing 4.925.440 pixels in my earlier example is MUCH easier/cheaper then pushing 6.912.000 pixels).

this means we can get 50% wider field of view and MUCH better peripheral vision in BoB, yet only need to push 2x the pixels (instead of 3x the pixels when you use 3x the same widescreen lcd)

many many thanks for including this oleg, this will make using BoB as a true simulator MUCH better for many of us. having good peripheral vision is very important, and doing it in a cheaper smart way like this will make it now possible for many of us !! (instead of only a few very rich people with an ultra expensive 3x 30' type setup)

I'm one of the "few" who likes long, crew-teamwork kind of scenarios. I'm horrible at fighter tactics/maneuvers. I'm usually the first "change" after the map load--you know, the 1st statistic.

I'd love to see S/SW England and the Bay of Biscay represented, with B-24s seeking subs who ar seeking ships, JU88s who are looking to spoil the snooper's day, and fighters looking to subtract JU88s from Lorient. But there are no diving subs, no maneuvering ships/subs, and no map. And you'd almost have to "hot seat" to other B24s on patrol to keep from going crazy. Still, I would love it.

As an alternative, I'd love to "command" an Atlantic Bogue Class escort carrier, fly one of its ASV-equipped stringbags, or fly one of its fighters to protect the stringbag.

But that is a different sim :(

Edit - content deleted as part of routine clean-up.

Again, this is the Battle of Britain guys. Read some books if you are not familiar with the battle.
...the more I read some of the posts here the more I am afraid we will see guys popping up and screaming "where is the Memphis Belle?!" once the game is released.

Replace the aircraft in the quote with the Short Sunderland and the Bf 110 and it's no so unreasonable. :)

I have the strong impression some here believe America was somehow in the Battle of Britain....

*shrug* More likely, some people here think the Battle of Britain was in 1943.

Yeah,
it will be really refreshing to miss the threads about .50's and p-51 who won the BoB :-D

The point some people miss is the map can be used after the Battle of Britain, when other aircraft become available. I'm looking forward to ground attack and air missions into occupied France during and after the Battle of Britain.

Oleg, will their options for the Hurricane and Spits to carry bombs. I know some did later in the war. It would be fun to make some FMB missions into France for a change from constant bomber intercept missions.

Hmmm
 

Buster Dee is thinking ahead . . . to next theater of operations.

Unless Oleg jumps into Korea after BOB release. That'd be something you'd be scrolling throug the BOB plane set, then the Korea ones show up in there.

What be funny is if Korea had some Italian planes (just joshing / joking ).

Clickable cockpit should be an option you can turn off.

I mean sometimes my non mouse hand is used to hold apples and my cigar.

The .50 cal threads won't show up until P-47, Wildcats, or P-51's show up and when Tiger Tanks are put in the game.




I got a question, were their American volunteers in the RAF in BOB?

With the right ground objects a Battle of France scenario is also possible.

Would need French aircraft and armour, but that map has way more possibilities than just the BoB.

I always thought it'd be cool to start off with the invasion of Poland, then Norway, and then the low countries and France and so on. Through expansions, SoW could eventually model all the major aerial conflicts of WWII.
________
Suzuki gt series

Yes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Bri...tle_of_Britain

Yes,

Very few, because by fighting for another country they lost the citizenship, according to a non-interventionist law. So, only the more enthusiasts arrived. The figures I've read in various books vary from 7 from 17.

The Billy Fiske cited by Wiki, was a famous bobsled champion and jet-set boy, just married when he died in August 1940, being a member of the 601 Sqn, the famous Millionaires Squadron.


Regards,
Insuber

In fact, I doubt that very much. I am aware however that you can make all kinds of later scenarios on the engine - but seen the repeated questions of some for stuff like B25's, or the alike I think many do not really know how about the BoB. But for the map: I have the impression it covers just the barely necessary for the BoB (Norvegia not included). Northern France, southern England, especially east southern England (Kent) as seen on the map editor in Mysticpumas vid. Sorry, no golf of Biskaya, No Battle of France. I don't think we get the terrain.

here my approximative guess on the Bob map - but who knows maybe I am wrong.

http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/8574/bobmap.jpg

Who knows, apart from the team making the game? Only thing that we can say is that we know it's 1:1 size, so this reduces (but doesn't eliminate) the likelihood that it's huge.

The screenshots don't seem to work!

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=2040

Since a couple of days now :(

Referring to a earlier discussion I guess the map is directed to north imho and Ipswich will not be part of it.

Its working now...

How is that a bad thing? It would indicate that SoW was picking up a mass audience. More sales, more cashflow, more sim.
Or possibly you'd prefer a quiz when you install BoB. If you don't know why the Spit couldn't follow the 109 into a vertical dive, your HD gets formatted.

I hope it would be done more like:
You have all installed, when you click on SoW SP icon you get offered choice of theatre:
BoB
Korea
Med (who knows :)

And each comes up with own interface, music and button style, etc. Like Rowan's BoB and MiG Alley, same but different.

XD some flight simmers can be so elitist can't they

which is the screenshots update thread ?? i see only comment threads for uploaded pics... a link ??

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=2040

thanks !

But once players are using TS or Ventrilo this not helps a lot. i dont known if is possible but it would be helpfull if game blocks another chat programs when server owner chooses to do so.

An option to unblock or block is highly desirable! Is it possible?

p.s.: im commenting cause Olegs said that radio quality ll depend distances between planes and radio towers.

Blocking team comms will not go over well.

I dare say it would cause many to skip the purchase.

Much of the fun of online play is being on comms with your mates and enjoying each other's company and banter.

Taking it away is not in the best interest of sales.

Be sure.

El Aurens, but once again, options.

But for BoB, at least, I won't bother. All British and German planes we'll be able to fly have radio, anyway...

I understand. However i said comms must be allowed using internal game radio and only with server desire.

TS and ventrilo can be used if server decides yes. Im only thinking about players who wishes a more hardcore gaming, i understand that there is players who would like to fly this way.

And the game could satisfy casual, medium, realistic and extreme realistic players (grognards)! Some players lock his belts, use aviator glasses, gloves and etc...:cool:

I totally disagree with this post. The segment of users like yourself is 1) probably very small 2) Surely elitist, in the negative sense of the word.

Paying 100 USD (!!!!!!) for a "premium user package", or even 30 USD, to get "additional tweaks or modules that are locked and not provided to all users" (!!!!!!!!!!) will be accepted by a very small minority of users, and thus create little revenues, but will for sure create a "digital divide" between "richer" and "poorer" customers. I can't imagine a better way to destroy and upset a loyal base of customers.

I'd prefer rather to pay for patches, if they include additional content. This will put all users on the same level and increase revenues IMHO, provided that the cost is reasonable and well distributed along the time.

Regards,
Insuber

Insuber is totally correct in his assessment of this.

You want more content? Fund a 3D modeler to make something, then have it included in the sim. How's that for "premium" content?