Ok, guys, if you play through the LW side, JG2's campaign, roll back to the release patch. I can definitely confirm the alpha/beta/whatever patch is causing it to crash when you're in the airfield's range. Rolled it back, no problem, installed patch, crash to desktop, rolled back, fine. Even changed my Nvidia drivers 4 times to check, and it's the damn patch...

Yes, I corresponded a little with Desastersoft and Thomas Voss said they have had a couple of users getting crashes and they both turned out to be issues with the user's PC not using a standard config - alpha patch, beta gfx drivers, overclocked cpu etc. He reminded that Desastersoft campaign interface has an update feature that will push out an update if needed once the new patch from 1C is final and rolled out.

H

I am really impressed with what Thomas has done with this. CloD has really captured my interest as a result for the first time.

He should run the english translations past a native english speaker at beta though. German jokes don't tranlate that well and english 'slang' of the period and the briefings reading fluidly would really raise it up a notch.
(not really a complaint as the missions are excellent quality so far, just a shame as its a missed opportunity isn't it.)

Something I thought would add a lot would be if the missions logged time so that you got mission flight hours in the pilot log and total time flown ?.

Sure the data will be logged so probably not too difficult to add to the desastersoft campaign GUI ?, its akin to the pilot log books from the time to include this and interesting to look back over isn't it.

Reading about the objectives, I am curious if the designers realize that Wick (or Dundas, or most any other fighter pilot) did not actually shoot down all the planes they were credited with. If you have to match Wick's score in actual planes shot down (vs planes claimed shot down), you are really doing something superhuman . . .

So far, I haven't run into any missions that require you to match Wick's (I haven't started the RAF side yet) successes. In fact, first mission, you're flying as his wingman on a recon intercept, you're not required to shoot anything down.

Interesting theory, impossible to prove, of course, but interesting anyway.

My opinion differs as i don't like such generalisations.

It is well known that kill scores were exaggerated, to be honest, for basically all factions in WWII. It's just too easy to make mistakes (such as 2 pilots counting the same A/C as a kill, or kills being claimed that actually survived). Even the very rigorous requirements of the RAF and LW could not prevent that.

That has been documented by practically all historians who looked at the question.

That said, I personally think the WvD mission objectives are not very meaningful. I mean, they serve as useful goals, but it's much more fun to fly the missions as a real pilot would. Nobody ever had a "goal" of killing x enemy bombers of what have you. They just flew, tried their best to make a dent in the enemy forces and survive, then moved on to the next mission.

Fortunately, WvD gives us the option to continue to the next mission even after failing, making it possible to enjoy it very realistically.

Itkovian

It does ramp up. The campaign manual says in the Wick campaign you have to shoot down 43 opponents in 25 missions.

Shores/Cull, Ford, and Lundstrom (among others) have proved it in regards to the PTO/CBI; similar work has been done for the the ETO (most of which I have admittedly not yet read). Shoot, we know the Luftwaffe overclaimed significantly during BoB . . . otherwise, they actually would have knocked the RAF out of the sky in the first couple of weeks of the battle, had their claims been true. And they knew it. Just about every intelligence service in WWII used some fraction of aircraft reported shot down when calculating actual damage done to the enemy.

So far, I've had mission objectives stating that no more than X friendly bombers can be shot down, far more satisfactory mission objective (even if I've failed it each time).