Question... Its all about CEM!

Hullo Chaps,

With the announcement of the preorder (damn my OCD like fixation on the Fw190) my interest in BOS has started a slow uphill climb... But before I throw away any cash I really need to know a few things on the CEM...

Now hopefully I do not open/pour salt on wounds but I am a huge fan of a certain game which name I will not mention, anyway this game gave me everything I could have asked for in terms of CEM and I really hope BOS has at least kept or increased this detail!

I have not flown in a few months and now my PC is dead so I really hope I have another game other than ROME 2 to give me a reason to bother fixing it.

Regards,
Krupi

P.S. How is the community, the main reason I stopped flying was due pretty much entirely to the behaviour of the sim community so I really hope things have started to calm down...

It is the same people and on top of that all the trouble makers that long abandoned CloD, RoF and etc have all resurfaced at the sight of fresh blood in the water.

No clue about CEM but probably as advanced as CloD.

Thanks,

What about DM that was the other thing I loved about COD, do we know what to expect?

I'm going to go with "try ROF because it's likely to be very similar." With this compressed development schedule they're concentrating on getting a WWII terrain along with ground units, planes, and their cockpits into the framework.
Going on ROF's development model, do NOT expect everything CloD had to be in BoS on the day of release. After all, not even CloD had everything it had by the final patch at the time of release. You know, things like "working" and "performing decently" and "not a buggy mess."
DMs and FMs can be tweaked later (and have been in every release of Il-2 and many ROF patches)...you don't want to be redoing 3D models and cockpits and terrains later.




The Jedi Master

You say that Jedi, but unfortunately my experience with RoF suggests otherwise at least in terms of system DM... Unless they have recently added control wire damage ?

And the whole % damage = lower max rpm thing leaves a bad taste in the mouth too. I never cared for the generic engine damage model especially when you compare it to how well they did the wing warping.

There's confirmed cockpit damage, gauges and the canopy and such can be damaged unlike Rise of Flight, hopefully they also add control wire damage, hydraulics damage and a better pilot damage model instead of ROF's four hits to the head and you're dead.

Nice to see you getting interested Krupi, though didn't think you would be touching BOS with a bargepole.

Thanks for the info redpiano

Furbs, I have seen lots of people that blasted BoS when it was announced, and not only BoS as a sim but its dev team, that now are very much interested and have buyed the premium edition...thats what I call hypocrisy, saying you wont buy anything from that dev team or studio or even saw people saying they wont buy a thing from jason, and then buying it, things that I will never understand...just my honest opinion.

Yeah, because both you never said anything you didn't mean in the heat of the moment stop trying to stir up animosity... I simply came here to ask a question.

I haven't been on the forums in months due to this kind of thing but clearly while I can at least turn the other cheek some you are not willing.

The classy thing to do furbs would have been to welcome me not continue to ostracise me for merely having liked a game you didn't.

[admin edit: no personal attacks]

More than a few people had valid questions on how the COD investors became BOS investors, and the backroom deals that made that happen. We will probably never know the full story on that, but if there were Russian government investment monies involved their was probably more than a little political intrigue. As hard as it is to find investors, I would have preferred that the BOS developers had found investors elsewhere. I know I would have supported both.

Personally I preferred the highly complex, mostly user friendly IL-2 FMB type that spawned thousands of missions/campaigns in the original series giving IL-2 a very long shelf life. I was impress on how quickly the ROF developers built their own game engine when they realized the old IL-2 engine wasn't capable of doing what they wanted. Their game engine is very effective using multicore cpu's yet struggled placing enough objects on the ROF map to make them interesting. That said, considering the bright minds in their development camp, and their statements of increased object count, etc, I'm quite sure that they will build a decent WW2 aircombat sim. I know Jason's hackles go up when I talk about the ROF full mission builder, but I haven't seen it spawn anywhere near the missions/campaigns that the original IL-2 FMB has. All else being equal some of the key's to longevity is decent AI, offline mission/campaign generation, and online ability for coops/dogfights/war generators/user servers/control.

Wow Krupi! way to jump in the deep end.

Iam pleased, i thought i said that in my post. I was just surprised considering how strongly you felt about how good BOS would be and the development team behind it.

No need for the name calling Krupi, this forum hasnt had anything like that for months, no need to start that all over again.

Really very happy your showing interest again, welcome back!

Thank you furbs, my apologies I did bite on what hasshashin said.

It sounds like 777 are moving in the right direction but I still have worries about the cem, fm and dm but which flight SIM doesn't (well apart from dcs )

As a fan of flight Sims I couldn't not support 777 when the next best thing are arcade "Sims" aka war thunder and warplanes.

Happy hunting,
Krupi

From what ive seen so far the development team are right on the money, of course i know there will be some aspects of the sim i wont agree with, but i know for sure they will be very well done and work 100%.

Remember this is just the start of the series, they have had less than 1 year development time so far and look at what they have achieved, they want to get the core technology right for the release, they understand that a 100% working sim at release is vital for this series and its reputation after what happened to CLOD.

They also have very good communication with the community, no BS, straight forward answers even though sometimes its not what we want to hear.

I have alot of faith in Jason and his team, they want what we want, that much its clear to me even if some features will have to wait(co-ops) until after release.

Have you seen the vids from the PR show in the US? if not i suggest you take a look, they say alot about where this sim is heading even at this early time.


CEM looks to me at least as good as CLOD(minus the start up and clickable cockpit) prop-pitch, mixture and such.

DM I think were going to be surprised on how complex this is going to be and im sure it will be acceptable to us simmers.

FM from what people have been saying from hands on experience they will be spot on but FMs are always debatable and always will be.

Il leave you with this little thing...

Krupi, is not the first time I say what I said on my last post on different forums, allways not giving names but still some people, you this case, bite and feel like I name them, I have nothing against you, and you know it, but if you bite is for a reason . But no worries Im use to it in my RL.

About the DM, I will leave you with this video, is not the DM, but I bet a lot of those parts will become part of the DM. And as Furbs said, we may not like all that is giving to us, but well, thats life.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvuAlIfWIPQ

Edit: I was never part of that community that make you leave. I was never a member of 1c forums or any other CloD related forum and as you can see I just sing up in here recently.

Also this Krupi...

This is my prediction:

BoS will be in a far better state (functionally) on release than CloD was, and may in fact be better than CloD is NOW (as of the final patch). However, it will not have some features at first (perhaps ever) or they will be simplified vis-a-vis CloD, and the crazies will blast it for NOT having feature A subsection D paragraph 5 that CloD, with the ATAG mods, and "another year or so of development" likely will have.

It doesn't matter what CloD does or doesn't have, it's what it MIGHT have or COULD have had that BoS is apparently up against. Reality is not in the evaluation.

As a result, arguing with those people is pointless because it's like arguing religion--facts are irrelevant, it's all about personal beliefs. If they BELIEVE that one small feature like "clickable cockpits" is the ONLY thing that matters, then CloD is the only WWII "sim" that exists and BoS is a fail.
Of course, it's their reasoning that has failed.



The Jedi Master

Close to how i think jedi, though i think BOS will win over quite a few of the CLOD diehards.

Both will have weak points as well as good, though i think BOS will in quite a short time will leave CLOD behind.

I hope that CLOD keeps improving with TF patches as well as BOS keeps getting support and the series keeps getting bigger.

Win/win.

From what I've seen so far BoS looks like it will be carrying the IL-2 torch and sticking it into a veritable haystack of creativity, but without the crazies trying to derail the forums arguing the toss over the rivet count of a plane or the bump mapping on a damn tank.

What we need is an honest, accurate sim that ticks the boxes for as many punters as possible so that a. They actually enjoy their buy in to a little piece of WW2 experience and b. they tell their mates/family about their good experiences so that maybe, just maybe we can garner a few more enthusiasts.
I'd like to think that the golden years of the '90s for flight simming wasn't the start of the decline as it seems crazy that the genre would die out just as the technology is there to give the user the best immersion so far.

It's going to be interesting to see how many of those that are accustomed to the prior Il-2 series (including CloD) tolerate the take off and landing aspect in BoS. The wheels will actually grip laterally as opposed to the runway/ground being made of wax that the prior series has had.

If the overall BOS experience is good, people will quickly adjust to any new AI,FM,DM,etc,etc, tendencies.

What?? No Il-2: Stalingrad Drift????



The Jedi Master

I just hope that at some point they add some more start up features, it gives each aircraft a bit more character.

Lets see if they can master the basics, I will be annoyed if certain parts of the DM are missing.

I would love to see dynamic smoke online in a few years time correct me if I am wrong but it's already kind of modelled in RoF singleplayer.

Reminds me of this. In general, people are fairly dumb but have no clue that they are.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/hom...ws-8697821.html

Im glad you are looking seriously at BoS Krupi. We must remember that 7771C are not just the RoF developers on their own but a lot of talented people from 1C aswell, people that worked on CloD. I cant imagine that their voices arent being heard in development terms with regards to DM in a WW2 theatre. After all DM in WW1 terms is worlds away from DM in WW2. For starters there are very few critical parts in a First War aircraft compared to its 2nd war equivalent.

It is for people very much more versed in engineering to tell us the minutae of that!

Im sure we will all have different opinions about what ultimately will be good/bad/indifferent about BoS but with such enthusiastic talented people at the helm I am happy to put my faith in them. I hope some of the people on the fence will aswell.

My career allows me to have a fairly good understanding of (modern) structures and systems but to produce a realistic representation of battle damage is something I have never had to do , one of the reason that I liked CoD was because they didn't compromise on the complexity of engine DM and I really hope this is something 1C has brought to BoS.

Like I have said elsewhere... RoF physical DM + CoD system DM would be incredibly but I imagine quite hard, I hope they pull it off

It shows that people want to listen to opinions that adhere to their own biases, and then use them as justification for their biases, and ignore listening to or giving any weight to any information that contradicts those biases.

A report comes out saying their opinion is wrong? "It's paid for by the opposition." "They conveniently ignore THIS and erroneously include THAT." Etc, etc, etc.

Apparently a new freedom granted in the last couple of decades is freedom from analytical thinking. You are not forced to actually come up with an opinion based on facts, you can just make one that fits your worldview which in turn generates more.



The Jedi Master

I just re-posted on the Il-2 BOS forum an old Warbirds of Prey post (a VERY long one) about flight-modeling disputes, which touches on a number of points in this thread and might be of interest to (patient) readers:

Way Too Long Discourse on Flight-Modeling Disputes.

In summary, my post tries to make 2 main points: first, due to a multiplicity of sources, each of which might have their own errors, biases, or incompleteness, it is difficult to ever get a completely authoritative flight model (not to attention the difficult task of trying to recreate it in a flight sim); and second, despite many losses of data during and after the war, there remain sources of flight modeling data from WW2, but they often differ and it's easy for anyone of us to claim that the developers "porked" or "ubered" an aircraft based upon the source we've got in hand (even if not cherry-picked) - we just need to realize that the developers are relying upon another source (and presumably on a rough amalgamation of a number of sources).

Your link is not working.


This one should work until Mack has a chance to change his link.
http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/1178-way-too-long-discourse-flight-modeling-disputes/


Wheels

How to have an FM/DM fight , or at least how I understand it.