How on earth could they write a BOB simulator with 'deeply-set limitations in the engine code do not allow us to minimize the margin of error at altitudes about 7 km (21,000 ft)'?

Who was driving this thing ?

Ya totally. I hate when you can't minimize the margin of error at altitudes about 7 km. It's too restricting for me, though I don't have a clue what it means. Cool, non issue for me.

• Fixed some non-working orders, removed others from the list. There are no more orders available to the player that the AI does not follow.

Just so I'm not hallucinating, they mean wingman orders, right?

How on earth could they write a BOB simulator with 'deeply-set limitations in the engine code do not allow us to minimize the margin of error at altitudes about 7 km (21,000 ft)'?

Who was driving this thing ?

Actually, that's not that surprising, if you really get into tweaking each peice of the AI customization sliders, you can reproduce pretty decent flying out of them. Certain things are still whack, like the AI knowing right when you pull the trigger everytime, but the flight behavior can be made a lot more realistic than most of the online, user made SP missions have put out there for us so far.

I agree the intelligence is there, it's just difficult to see what with the three stooges routine it can engage in

Ya well this is a direct quote from Luthier - 'No, we had planned on adding more BOB content, but this Furbs fellow kept saying there would be no additions, so we scrapped it.'

j/k

Pretty sure that if you do any research you will find that the battle was mainly fought at medium altitudes of around 15000 feet, and most of the types used could not reach 20000 with a bomb load! These were unpressurized early war aircraft, not B-29 raids!

Craig

I saw the most people on the banana forum that I have ever seen 267... ...if you build it, they will come.

Chivas, told you no problem with working other stuff in this patch and they were only working on BOM.

Even if were getting no more content for BOB we can get other fixes pretty soon maybe. my hopes ARE some what raised.

Ya well this is a direct quote from Luthier - 'No, we had planned on adding more BOB content, but this Furbs fellow kept saying there would be no additions, so we scrapped it.'

j/k

I don't understand your first sentence but OK.

I mean, i said before the shouldn't be a problem adding fixes with the performance patch, you said they prob couldn't because of coding.

Well, I am aware of several raids where the base height was ~20kft

The developer or BS said the patch would only be a performance patch. I said I understood why because they wouldn't want to introduce to many variables during fixing and testing the new code, but I hoped they would be able to introduce some fixes to the FM, AI, etc. I suppose since the patch took so long they were able to reduce the performance variables enough to add some AI etc fixes without over complicating the bug testing. There are no absolutes in this type of work and the developer can only guess how long it will take and what features will be ready to implement for any given patch.

Hmmm, how long till BOM Chivas? a year, with luck 2 more patches, i hope for DM and FM' revisions, COOP's and maybe new clouds.

kft is one alternative standard measure of altitude in aeronautics (and also telecommunications).

While you might not like the 'style' of it, it is routinely used in NASA, and other documentation.

From a reference I have on hand:

"“The average wind speed (mph) and average relative humidity (10, 20, 30 (brown) and 70, 80, 90 (green) percent) for 0 to 1 kft above ground level (agl), 1 to 2 kft (agl), 2 to 3 kft (agl), 3 to 4 kft (agl), 4 to 5 kft (agl) and 5 to 6 kft (agl).”

Key to a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration diagram."

You'll have contrails at 21000ft, no problem.

Ya well this is a direct quote from Luthier - 'No, we had planned on adding more BOB content, but this Furbs fellow kept saying there would be no additions, so we scrapped it.'

j/k

You'll have contrails at 21000ft, no problem.

We've performed a tremendous amount of work testing and improving flight models in the game, as well as improving various aircraft engines. We used actual pilot's notes and flight testing data during the process (thank you Sean!). Unfortunately some deeply-set limitations in the engine code do not allow us to minimize the margin of error at altitudes about 7 km (21,000 ft) where most aircraft begin to perform worse than their real-life counterparts. Fixing this requires more extensive code rework and will therefore only appear with the upcoming sequel. However at lower altitudes most flyables will perform much closer to real life. We also have to note that some aircraft, most notably Spitfire Mk.II, had better performance than the real thing. Others, especially their engines, had reduced performance. We've addressed these serious issues and made our planes fly much closer to the real thing.

More specifically:

G.50
Temperature models of the engine were wrong due to incorrect data. The engine could not get up to required power at all altitudes. We've also added +100 boost for WEP mode.

Spitfire Mk.II
The aircraft's speed performance was too good at all altitudes, sometimes 60 mph better than the real thing.

Spitfire Mk.I
Fixed the top speed dip above 18,000 ft.

Hurricane Mk.I
Speed performance was also too good at all altitudes, similar to the Spit II.

Blenheim Mk.IV
Had many problems with the engine model. The engine overheated at normal RPM, the plane could not get up to stated airspeed at all altitudes. Maximum allowed airspeed was too great, and the plane could get up to 560 mph in a dive. A huge amount of work was performed to improve the plane's FM and bring it up to speed.

As much as the patch is welcome, what is really disappointing is CLOD will never be a full BOB sim, no squadrons, no pilot roster, no proper pilots career. You cant even enter a pilots name.
When you fire up CLOD there is NOTHING in the game that makes you feel your taking part in the Battle of Britian, no history, no immersion and the GUI is cold and uninviting, nothing that draws you to single player.

True Uther, Though im a 90% online player i still like to fly a offline career now and again.

Just all them years of waiting and dreaming of what CLOD would be, then seeing the state of the released sim it was very dis-heartening, but now to it wont ever be a real BOB sim is gutting.

How many years until the next BOB sim?

I still think it should be called Storm of War...

Im not moping Uther, in fact ive done a couple of hours flying this weekend with the new Nvidia drivers and it looked much much better. Im hopeful the online game will be good enough IF we get COOP's.

Its just the "Battle of Britain" is my favorite area, i must have read about 50 books on it, raised my hopes too much i guess.

Just not "Storm of War: Battle of Britain" like it was originally going to be called. Something more like "Sprinkles of War: Skirmishes over the Channel" would be more appropriate.

Drizzles After Dunkirk

"handbags over Hastings"

If you want that you are looking in the wrong place. You should get BoBII if you really want that.
IL2 has never really done offline well IMO.

Righto , so is RoF any good on the SP side or is MP where it is at ? Might have to start playing catchup.

I think were going to have to write off the single player aspect of CLOD until maybe we get the SDK and let the community have a go, though even then i dont know if it will be possible to implement a decent career system.

Is there?

Hmmm - Is there any interest in a SimHQ review? I can check with The Management and we could get someone good to write it (i.e. not me) as it does seem like a big hole in the game that others are trying fill. I think they have a demo as well:

http://www.desastersoft.com/en/product-wick-dundas.html

I tried it when it first came out, but it didn't work due to all my Strange/Unusual mods I had added, but it might be worth a tinker.