Cliffs of Dover Is The Best. But Some Of You Don't Appreciate It.

[Feathered_IV]

I have no issue with the developers over the current performance. I appreciate that optimization is underway and it does not effect my opinion of the title, despite having a lower end machine.

What I do find clouds my opinion if the "sim" is the lack of content to enable anything more than a shallow BoB-lite skirmish generator.

No warships, one merchant and a handful of lifeboats means the Channel Offensive phase is beyond reach. Pacific Fighters looks flush with ships by comparison.

One RAF voice actor for the entire group of nations involved. Sounds like he's drawing words out of a hat too.

No radar. Some arcade approximation will give you a stilted position of a nearby enemy, but for a meaningful intercept vector, height or number of contacts... Forget it.

Crew members are just decoration.

Viable Bomber numbers are barely up to a diversionary raid, let alone anything approaching the Battle of Britain in any real sense.

Never mind current performance. It's the crushing lack of HISTORICAL content, not Technical content that has already made me loose interest.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Salute

From all the whining going on here, you'd think they'd lost their homes and been bankrupted, instead of spending $45 on an incomplete product.

The whiners here should relax. This game is full of problems, it does need a lot of work, but anyone who does not see the potential is a fool.

I have a I7 2600k, running at 4.3ghz and a GTX-570 and the game runs flawlessly for me in all conditions. Others who don't have as good a system are having problems, but the game is being optimized continually.

When you have a good system like mine, the game is truly spectacular.

More of a concern to me are the following issues:

1) Flight model lacks tailplane effects on takeoff; while stall turns, humpties and tailslides can definitely be done, they're nowhere near as 'crisp' as they ought to be. The spin entries are every bit as odd as they were in IL2. (that is from a real pilot's evaluation)

2) Performance and equipment of the 109's, Spitfires and Hurricanes are not modelled at all correctly, in particular speeds and climbs are low, some aircraft have either the wrong props or poor fuel mixture modelling, and the aircraft universally suffer from a lack of performance over 10,000 ft, and backfiring due to lack of modelling of the altitude compensation in the carburetion or fuel injection systems.

3) Not enough ships to model the 'Convoy' phase of the battle, which is really the only stage which can be flown now with large numbers of aircraft.

4) Game really does need reflections modelled. We saw reflections in a series of promo videos, but I have a feeling they were eliminated in this foolish waste of effort on the epilepsy issue. Reflections were a key factor in WWII combat, the glint of sun off a canopy or shiny piece of metal were often the means by which enemy aircraft were spotted. Rise of Flight does this quite well and CoD needs to re-introduce this.

Even with all these problems, the game clearly has a depth which is not matched by any others out there. I fly RISE OF FLIGHT, and while that game currently has a flight model closer to the real thing, its damage model, and graphics do not come near the immersiveness of CoD. RoF also does not have anywhere near as complete an aircraft set as CoD, RoF went for the money and produced nearly all the Scouts to sell to those who want quick gratification, but the game completely lacks the two seaters which were present in large numbers and which are an absolute necessity for a decent online war. Realistic campaigns are impossible in RoF either online or offline. That is not the case in CoD, with the planeset available right now I could design a Night 'Barge Bombing' campaign for the RAF, a 1941 daylight, 'Rodeo' campaign for the RAF, a late '40 'Jabo' campaign for the Germans, a 'Night Blitz' 1940-41 campaign for the Luftwaffe, or any number of others. (except the convoys WE NEED AN RN DESTROYER!!!)

In any case, the original poster of this thread is partially right. CoD will be the best, even if it isn't now.

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by *Buzzsaw*

Salute

From all the whining going on here, you'd think they'd lost their homes and been bankrupted, instead of spending $45 on an incomplete product.

The whiners here should relax. This game is full of problems, it does need a lot of work, but anyone who does not see the potential is a fool.

I have a I7 2600k, running at 4.3ghz and a GTX-570 and the game runs flawlessly for me in all conditions. Others who don't have as good a system are having problems, but the game is being optimized continually.

When you have a good system like mine, the game is truly spectacular.

More of a concern to me are the following issues:

1) Flight model lacks tailplane effects on takeoff; while stall turns, humpties and tailslides can definitely be done, they're nowhere near as 'crisp' as they ought to be. The spin entries are every bit as odd as they were in IL2. (that is from a real pilot's evaluation)

2) Performance and equipment of the 109's, Spitfires and Hurricanes are not modelled at all correctly, in particular speeds and climbs are low, some aircraft have either the wrong props or poor fuel mixture modelling, and the aircraft universally suffer from a lack of performance over 10,000 ft, and backfiring due to lack of modelling of the altitude compensation in the carburetion or fuel injection systems.

3) Not enough ships to model the 'Convoy' phase of the battle, which is really the only stage which can be flown now with large numbers of aircraft.

4) Game really does need reflections modelled. We saw reflections in a series of promo videos, but I have a feeling they were eliminated in this foolish waste of effort on the epilepsy issue. Reflections were a key factor in WWII combat, the glint of sun off a canopy or shiny piece of metal were often the means by which enemy aircraft were spotted. Rise of Flight does this quite well and CoD needs to re-introduce this.

Even with all these problems, the game clearly has a depth which is not matched by any others out there. I fly RISE OF FLIGHT, and while that game currently has a flight model closer to the real thing, its damage model, and graphics do not come near the immersiveness of CoD. RoF also does not have anywhere near as complete an aircraft set as CoD, RoF went for the money and produced nearly all the Scouts to sell to those who want quick gratification, but the game completely lacks the two seaters which were present in large numbers and which are an absolute necessity for a decent online war. Realistic campaigns are impossible in RoF either online or offline. That is not the case in CoD, with the planeset available right now I could design a Night 'Barge Bombing' campaign for the RAF, a 1941 daylight, 'Rodeo' campaign for the RAF, a late '40 'Jabo' campaign for the Germans, a 'Night Blitz' 1940-41 campaign for the Luftwaffe, or any number of others. (except the convoys WE NEED AN RN DESTROYER!!!)

In any case, the original poster of this thread is partially right. CoD will be the best, even if it isn't now.

Can you fly with 50-100 aircraft over london with mid range graphics settings and no stuttering/fps over 25? If not then you are not telling the truth.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Originally Posted by Heliocon

Can you fly with 50-100 aircraft over london with mid range graphics settings and no stuttering/fps over 25? If not then you are not telling the truth.

Haven't tried that yet, only have tried the plain jane missions, but the plain jane missions over London have been without any issues, at my top settings, even when I increased the number of aircraft. My GTX-570 is overclocked. (I plan on adding a second GTX-570 when SLI is enabled)

If you are having a problem with your setup, you are doing something wrong. (unless you haven't overclocked that 980x, which can easily go 4.5 ghz without liquid cooling by the way)

In any case, performance anxiety aside, I didn't expect to see full scale 200 plane battles over London in the initial release. We didn't see that kind of thing with the original IL-2, even at the late stages of IL-2 1946 you couldn't fight a 'Battle of Berlin' with two hundred plane raids, and this game is far more complex and demanding. I am encouraged that multicore support can be implimented, it would suggest to me that there is a lot of headroom to improve the capabilities of this engine, and I believe we will be fighting large battles over London in a year or two.

I am hoping this game is in for the long haul, like IL-2, if you guys would be realistic and stop with the continually whining and complaining and think a bit into the future, you might realize there is a LOT of potential available, and we have a lot of good things to look forward too.

Unless the whiners drown out the good responses and the games sales suffer and it ends up being cancelled as far as any further development is concerned...

Now, THAT would be something worth crying about.

What's we're seeing now is a bunch of 40 year old drama queens blowing off steam from their dayjobs.

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by *Buzzsaw*

Haven't tried that yet, only have tried the plain jane missions, but the plain jane missions over London have been without any issues, at my top settings, even when I increased the number of aircraft. My GTX-570 is overclocked. (I plan on adding a second GTX-570 when SLI is enabled)

If you are having a problem with your setup, you are doing something wrong. (unless you haven't overclocked that 980x, which can easily go 4.5 ghz without liquid cooling by the way)

In any case, performance anxiety aside, I didn't expect to see full scale 200 plane battles over London in the initial release. We didn't see that kind of thing with the original IL-2, even at the late stages of IL-2 1946 you couldn't fight a 'Battle of Berlin' with two hundred plane raids, and this game is far more complex and demanding. I am encouraged that multicore support can be implimented, it would suggest to me that there is a lot of headroom to improve the capabilities of this engine, and I believe we will be fighting large battles over London in a year or two.

I am hoping this game is in for the long haul, like IL-2, if you guys would be realistic and stop with the continually whining and complaining and think a bit into the future, you might realize there is a LOT of potential available, and we have a lot of good things to look forward too.

Unless the whiners drown out the good responses and the games sales suffer and it ends up being cancelled as far as any further development is concerned...

Now, THAT would be something worth crying about.

What's we're seeing now is a bunch of 40 year old drama queens blowing off steam from their dayjobs.

I dont have the game yet, but I havent seen any videos of people flying over london with good settings and no lag, let alone planes in combat. You have fraps?

[patrat1]

Originally Posted by Heliocon

I dont have the game yet, but I havent seen any videos of people flying over london with good settings and no lag, let alone planes in combat. You have fraps?

london bomber intercept mission. all settings high, except buildings which are set to very high and unlimited. everything on except ssao. gpu set to quality.

heres my fraps score.

Frames, Time , Min, Max, Avg
20164, 431998, 25, 92, 46.676

like buzzsaw im running a i5 2500k with a gtx 570 OC. the i5 is OC to 4.5ghz.

[*Buzzsaw*]

Originally Posted by Heliocon

I dont have the game yet, but I havent seen any videos of people flying over london with good settings and no lag, let alone planes in combat. You have fraps?

You know Helicon, I am not interested in wasting my time posting a track and/or screenshots, I'm too busy building missions and having fun. (currently building a series of missions for a RAF Squadron based in the Portsmouth area as it defends the docks etc.) Choose to believe what I am saying or not, either way it doesn't concern me. It seems to me you and your ilk are more concerned with NOT having fun, and I refuse to indulge you and ruin my own good time.

[Friendly_flyer]

Originally Posted by *Buzzsaw*

I'm too busy building missions and having fun. (currently building a series of missions for a RAF Squadron based in the Portsmouth area as it defends the docks etc.) Choose to believe what I am saying or not, either way it doesn't concern me.

If I was sitting on the UBI or 1C board, I would put up a server for people like you to upload missions, campaigns, skins, settings etc, similar to Mission4today and other sites. One of th etings thal really made IL2 enjoyable was all the great usermade material. One of the ways of making up for the lack of it in the release wersion of CoD would have been to offer a "one stop" site for content.

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by *Buzzsaw*

You know Helicon, I am not interested in wasting my time posting a track and/or screenshots, I'm too busy building missions and having fun. (currently building a series of missions for a RAF Squadron based in the Portsmouth area as it defends the docks etc.) Choose to believe what I am saying or not, either way it doesn't concern me. It seems to me you and your ilk are more concerned with NOT having fun, and I refuse to indulge you and ruin my own good time.

Fine with me, I just dont like people bullshitting and lying on the forums all the time. So if you are going to make a claim that no one else can and not support it, be my guest.

[Hunden]

Originally Posted by Heliocon

I dont have the game yet, but I havent seen any videos of people flying over london with good settings and no lag, let alone planes in combat. You have fraps?

LMAO!!!! With all the bitching coming out of your pie hole and you don't even have the game yet. I beg you please do not purchase this title until it is running at top speed Your bitching about something you don't even own yet for Gods sake stop, just STOP!!!!!