Comparison to other Sims

Hello dear SimHQ Community,

I'm a SP-only guy liking a battle of britain setting. So I'm obviously interested in wotr. Hearing only good opinions about woff increases this interest. But I never played woff.

On the one hand I enjoyed flying the 109 Emil in cliffs of dover and battle of moscow very much.

On the other hand the ai and campaign in bob2wov are the best I've seen so far.

So my question is: How does the flight and damage model compare to clod or bom?

And how does the ai and campaign system compare to bob2wov?

Looking forward to your opinions!

Hopefully some guys can chip in Eisenfaust.

FM: Lightyears behind Cliffs of Dover... Absolute lightyears... The FM doesn't even compare to 1946 IMHO. Even with that being said, Cliffs' FM is pretty far behind IL-2: Great Battles. If you've flown the Hurricane or Emil in any other sim, this one is going to feel strange and alien to you, the aircraft won't respond in any of the ways you expect it to, etc. It is very hard to "suspend disbelief" with the FMs having their roots in CFS3. I was told the FMs had "good feedback" in beta... I don't know who was smoking what or who they were talking to.

DM: Graphically way behind every other sim on the market. Systems modeling is on par with Cliffs if not a little worse. Cliffs and WOTR both leave something substantial to be desired with regards to physics, collisions, etc.

I don't think WOTR or WOFF are really sold on the merits of the accuracy or feel of the flight or damage models. At least, that was never even remotely the marketing appeal to me.

AI: Pretty enjoyable. They still do things that are physically impossible (I've seen AI do inverted vertical climbs under negative G in both WOTR and WOFF - the AI doesn't use the player's FM... YMMV...) but RTB logic, logic concerning odds/wounding/moral/status, etc. add a nice layer of enjoyment.

Campaign: A cut above the rest that are currently supported/on the market in all aspects although I haven't played BOB and can't compare the two.

Firstly..Welcome to the forum Eisenfaust .

My personal experience so far pal
Il2 BOX series has excellent FM as does COD it's "feeling" of flight is unsurpassed IMO but I do Personnally think that WOTR,S is way better than il 1946. But yep its not has good as Box series of FM,s IMO

DM I've not seen to much experience of this yet,so honestly I couldn't accurately comment at this time.

Ai again I've not seen what Space Ghost describes regarding the inverted vertical climbs but I'm not going to doubt him I've no reason to. The Ai experience I've had so far has been excellent,enemies break off,head for home if "feeling" threatened etc..not like the robotic Ai that I've often come up against in the BOX series (that actually has stopped me playing) it's behavior at times in that series is preposterous. And it's such a shame has the rest of the sim is good at times.

Campaign. Again I'm with Space Ghost. I tried to get BOB sorted but kept having ground graphical anomalies so I gave it up but..for such a early phase WOTR looks like it'll continue just like WOFF did. Its campaign is very very good. And with extra craft/phases planned it'll get better and better IMO.

Il use a phrase that was written a while back and just replace ROF and WOFF with IL2Box and WOTR.

If you want to feel what it's like to fly a WW1/WW2 craft and enjoy MP then the box series and ROF is unsurpassed (even if I Personally didn't like some of the ROF FM,s) If you want to feel what it's like to be part of a squadron,where you genuinely care about your fellow flyers,you want to see your wingman coming home with you. Part of a "war" and enjoy SP flight then with WOFF/WOTR IMO you can't go wrong. Is WOTR perfect? No it's not..Am I really enjoying it? My god absolutely I'm having a blast. I'm certainly looking forward to what OBD bring next. Also you get OBD,S incredible service they've been around a while and are very active here on the forum

Regards Adger

A lot has been said in the previous posts here but one thing the track record shows is that the OBD that are responsible for the release and ongoing development of WOFF and WOTR are bar none the most committed to providing ongoing support and development. Just browse the WOFF forums and you can readily see that the Dev Team do not sit on their laurels. Ten plus years of support and development and no end in sight is enough to make me buy into the products. Both sims keep getting improvements to all aspects of play. WOFF now is light years ahead of what it started out as back in the day. All this keeps me flying their sims.

If all this is important to you in your purchased sim products then you can rest assured it is a good investment

Best Regards

Well Said Robert and I will drink to that.

I know of one flight sim that I tried several times over a period of 4 years.
Sometimes on take off, the flight lead and every one but you goes into an endless circle.
Or after the end of a mission, you land and every one else crashes.
I never saw this fixed.

I'm not getting on that merry go round anymore.

OBD would have been all over that and resolved the AI problem.

OBD is the best and they have the track record to prove it.

Best Regards.

Tango

As far as recommendations go, OBD's products come fully recommended by PC Gamer, Rock Paper Shotgun, Armchair General, Flightsim.com, PC Pilot, and the Royal Flying Association, to name but a few. The Flight models are less cinematic than other games, but are largely based on historical data and thoroughly researched. The graphics are in line with most commercial products, when appropriately enhanced. The campaign system is widely regarded as the best available in any flight simulator, and the ai is programmed to behave appropriately for the period . Leave your perceptions, expectations and past experiences at the door, you're in a safe pair of hands right from the start.

Real pilots fly these games, the oldest players veterans of the actual conflict or the immediate period.
OBD delivers in the one area you really want, the single-player experience, designed for it, from the ground up.
I know of no other contemporary product with that singular focus or historical data-driven development, built on a body of similar quality past work.

Many people took one look and consigned it to the trash heap at first glance, but we have accrued supporters and converts from all other contemporary sims, and when you consider the budget and dev team, that's not an unremarkable achievement.

It is early days to judge WotR, but my thoughts so far in comparison to CloD and BoM mainly (I have no experince of Bob2wov):

FM - Lacking in a lot, especially compared to BoM, it feels 'easy'. I don't know if a Hurricane should be able to, but trying a snap roll just smoothly moved me around in the sky, in a BoM/S (VVS fighter) aircraft it will snap you quickly. Saying that, for me, as someone who doesn't know how aircraft should fly, this doesn't actually bother me that much, of course I want a real FM, but my focus is on enjoyment and the overall experience, not doing an accurate assessment of a FM. It did seem however that when I opened my 109 canopy (and it didn't rip off ) it ddn't seem to affect the flight of the aircraft, that was a disappointment. Also haven't noticed any impact of fuel weight, but that might be there.

DM - Good that there are system failures, I just had one for what seemed like 'no reason', also had a wing tip shot off in another mission that I could 'feel'. I like the engine losing power effect too, it is a really good feeling to hear something is up, and see your boost slowly dropping, you check fuel mix etc. but still it is going down, love that. But as Adger said, it is perhaps too early to tell overall. What I don't like however, is the collision effects, it often is just a jump to an explosion, even sometimes with a soft touchdown. Also in water there was no sinking when I put own, just an explosion and my pilot was dead with the career over, I think I will always bail over water in future. I suspect this can never be improved and is just the limit of the old engine, a shame if it is the case as staying 'alive' is what playing this is all about. The 109 canpoy not coming off when I opened it at >200kmh was a surprise and disappointing.

Graphics - I'd like the buildings to be a bit dulled down, they stand out a bit too much in colour and look more 'boxy' in my opinion, but otherwise terrain looks nice down low and it is suprisingly acceptable to the eye generally. Clouds look a bit poor up close and there are a few glitches with them for me but when seen from a distance they actually look rather realistic. Jumps between weather are poor, like in FSX. Aircraft are fine externally (except having the same numbers/letters on them), and internally totally fine, but perhaps lacking a few control animations.

AI - A real strong point so far, especially decisions. Time will tell if I notice any odd quirks or bugs, but so far it is just so much fun dogfighting the AI, and, the 'easy' FM actually may help this feeling in that the scraps feel more 'choreographed' perhaps, it feels like you're up against an 'equal'.

Campaign - So far this absolutely SHAMES the others I've played. I am utterly perplexed by how others can't get this right, WotR shows exactly how it can be done. It is the campaign that has me here in the first place. Atmosphere is great, named pilots, a sensible layout, music, old photos, no space-age font and theme to the UI, kill claim system etc. Time will tell if there is depth to it, and when multi crew aircraft are here I hope it tracks the crew of at least the players aircraft, and, there are a few cosmetic things I would change (but there always will be, that's just the nature of users!)

Some things worth mentioning:

Flak is a real treat in this game.
I miss being able to set convergence to my choice.
AI flies nicely together, they don't bounce all over the place, it makes forming up easier and therfore much more immersive.
I want to come back for more!

Overall, WotR is a bit of a GTA San Andreas compared to a GTA IV, a bit dated in some ways but just so enjoyable, whereas other Sims may look better but you may end up just frustrated beyond enjoyment.

Eisenfaust, welcome to WOTR. As I am not a pilot, I will not comment on flight models. It feels “real” enough to me. Like yourself, I am SP only and can tell you WOFF and WOTR are the best bar none. Nothing is scripted so it never gets old. I seriously doubt you will be let down. As others have stated, OBD is solidly behind there product anD there support is first rate. Hope to see you in the skies soon.

Chief;

I beg to differ on your above statement. I can consistently ditch in the water and survive without engine explosion. I made a vid which is at the following link that demonstrates this:
click to view

Purely subjective of course, old chap but "lightyears"?? when was the last time you flew a real Hurricane?

That is really cool to know, my experience must have been the exception to the rule so to speak. There's no need for evidence, I totally accept your experience. It is early days still so difficult to know what is the norm. Good to know I can try to ditch in future.

As opposed to when the last time all the others posting their opinions flew real Hurricanes...?

I can tell you first hand, as someone who has trained and worked on aviation and military flight simulators, as well as actually flying real aircraft, that the FMs in these sims often seem to leave a bit to be desired.

But some others are definitely more "realistic" than what the older CFS3 platform seems to be able to provide, even with more recent enhancements (whatever was involved).

But, more to your comment...maybe we should do a poll to see who has actual flight experience, (real) simulator training/experience, etc?

Hence why I said "cinematic". Whilst a weighty, lag-based model might feel like the plane is pushing and fighting the air and therefore how you might imagine flight to be, they're not actually based on the performance of said aircraft in that environment.
If you're going to have historical accuracy, it's better to have the flight models based on the historical records and flight testing data, rather than simply design a animation system that plays to expectations. The comments of real pilots, and combat veterans, are the proof of the pudding as far as that goes.
I spent ten years designing and programming games for paradox and others, as a side interest.

yes, kksnowbear, most companies fudge their physics. Let us know when you purchase WotR.

To stay on course, here, I was responding to the point raised about real flight experience. Strictly.

Seems there's a double standard: If you agree with the ardent supporters, your opinion is valid, regardless of experience.

But if you don't agree, then even actual experience doesn't count, because of 'fudging' physics and so on.

(BTW, have you actually piloted an aircraft, Matt? Not a big deal to me, just wondering - you know, because the question was raised, after all. I didn't bring it up, so don't blame me).

KKsnowbear;

Your experience on flight sims and aircraft are a valuable resource and therefore it would be greatly appreciated if you would put your practical experience in play by flying the sims in question and commenting on their pros and cons. It would be appreciated by all here I'm sure.

Best Regards;

+1

Stop acting like somebody is beating your dog, Matt.

It's just silly.

Yes, the FM is lightyears behind currently competing products.

This stalwart defensiveness is hilariously unbecoming.

hehe, i get asked that all the time. Partly because a fair few musicians take to the skies, as a hobby, and partly because I score these things, plenty of pilots talk about my music creating the sense of flight, which is ideal really. Done some gliding, but I do not have a further urge to sit in a cockpit, I'm a sea-faring fellow.
I'm happy that veterans of ww2, korea and vietnam respond positively to our products, those comments are what i'm after. The "why am i here" attitude from some new arrivals is even better, as I know we have what they're looking for underneath ^^.

FM is very subjective, for some it is about their real flying experience, and for others it is comparative gameplay experience. One is more science and the other more art . Opinions from the different approaches are not likely to be able to be held against each other in any detail, but both are valid customer opinions, albeit from different perspectives.

The OP asked fora comparison with other games, not with real life, maybe they meant reality, but that wasn't specified.

You're right. My comments actually did include mention of how this performs against other sims, I just didn't necessarily make direct comparisons. I said 'these sims' seem to leave a bit to be desired, and yet, in my own observation, there were others that seemed to do better than something based on CFS3 can do**

Again, I mentioned real life experience because someone else - not me - brought it up, though I don't know for sure, presumably to gauge the accuracy of individuals' perspectives. My point in doing so is that many/most of those playing these games don't actually have any real aviation experience - strictly, mind you, in response to the notion that someone can't have a valid opinion unless they've flown a real Hurricane. In fact, to your point, the OP didn't ask about real life, so I'm not really sure why it was injected - again, not by me - into the dialogue. But, it was asked, so I responded. Simple as that.


** EDIT: I've heard people use the expression that "it flies like it's on rails" regarding the FM, but TBH I'm not sure what that actually means, though I could guess. I put it at a more general feeling something's just not behaving as it should sometimes, with the occasional "No way that could ever happen". But these discussions often deteriorate rapidly, so I've avoided them for the most part. I don't fly these sims because I expect absolute FM fidelity, IMHO that would be sort of stupid to expect, to be clear. TBH I only chimed in here because someone interjected concerning 'real' flight experience.

Ha, yeah, I kind of regret opening my mouth, I only responded to the thread because the developer promoted for some.

I like what I've seen of WotR so far, and look forward to what is to come.It is ultimately very enjoyable to play and worth the money, regardless of any comparison-based criticism I've listed earlier.

^^This. I'm in the same category,I'm having fun,I'm enjoying it immensely same as I enjoy WOFF and countless other sims. And that's what I play games (and that's what they are) for..Fun.

Fwiw I've never flown a real life aircraft specifically the Hurricane or Emil and unless these craft have been flown by someone that flies these sims then surely everything else is pure guesswork?
If anyone here has actually flown these planes then I'd love to hear your comments..and even then il continue to have fun in this sim,it may sound selfish but that's what I purchase games for.

Regards
Adger

The rails comment, is in reference to a more linear flight path...Ie: the aircraft's response offers less lag and instability, so its behaviour is more restricted with less vertical and lateral deviance. Some people expect a given object to behave more like a feather flying through the air at low speed, as compared to a dart or javelin at high speed. If you're expecting a buffeting feather, you'd be disappointed with a coursing bullet or javelin.

From my perspective it's all down to the person playing the game... I have RoF, BoS, WoFF, WoTR, IL2 1946 and quite a few others. I enjoy playing all of them, they all give me hours of fun and enjoyment.
They 'all' have aspects that need improving, they also have aspects that they do better than the others.
If we could take all the things that each sim do really well and make them into a single game, we would be well on the way to having the perfect combat sim.

That said, I will keep them on my HD for years to come I suspect
As it stands, regardless of it's present state, I am enjoying WoTR even as it is now... I'm sure it will improve as time goes on.

Right.

So, I wasn't debating what the rail comment meant, just that it's one way I've heard complaint about FMs expressed - and, as it happens, not one I've used.

Let me say once again that I am not the one who brought up real life flight experience. It's just that this often gets brought up, mostly for two reasons:

1. To somehow discredit a poster's opinion; they've never flown aircraft X, therefore, they can't possibly know anything about how it behaves. (Not really accurate, and usually only brought up simply because the odds are fair that very few who are playing a game actually have flown the "real thing". So, it's relatively safe and easy to cast doubt.)

2. Somehow a given product's producer is extolling the product's virtues by claiming it faithfully reproduces flight dynamics (or the even more abstract "feeling of flight"...which I've always found amusing. Since it's impossible to quantify and entirely subjective, it's another easy claim).

But, for hopefully one final time: I didn't bring it up.

I'd be absolutely thrilled if that happened.

I too have played most of those titles (and the others that often come up, like RB3D and so on...). And you're right, they all have their pros and cons. It just happens the OP in this case asked for specific comparisons.

i did actually do some music for Rise of Flight (1c/777)...it was... an interesting experience.

Nobody's said you have kksnowbear,anyone that reads the posts surely knows that you didn't.

Does that have anything to do with anything OP asked?

No, not really.

Thanks for reminding us though?

Neither does your reply. Hows your reply helped to the OP,s original questions?
Correct me if I'm wrong but..you've had a refund? So you didn't/don't enjoy WOTR?
If that's correct then ( I'm assuming) your here to 'stir" the Pot so to speak..it certainly looks that way to me.

Comparing to other sims, providing experience of other sims, answering the idea that you could combine approaches/elements of other sims/teams... I remain on-topic.

As you can probably tell by now, comparing game X to game Y in the same category (WW2 Flight Simulations) is purely subjective. Using WW1 simulations as an example, sometimes I play WOFF when I feel like the ultimate single player immersion. Sometimes I'll play flying circus in vr when I want to feel like I'm flying in the aircraft and absorb the scenery around me. Sometimes I'll play RoF when I want to joint a multiplayer session. Really depends on my mood at that moment and what will satisfy it. I own games that I can enjoy and have fun.... even if it's just a mindless game of smashing things like in Red Faction.

I already answered OP's question.

Leave your presumptive melodrama at the door.

Simply asking questions like yourself

Having followed this thread, and out of pure intellectual interest, I would love here from someone who has flown the aircraft, comment on the pros/cons of the FM's.
I realize that there is the possibility that the FM's / sim engine may not be able to simulate the full flight characteristics of the given models, but it would provide some background knowledge that could be drawn upon and applied if it is at all possible, sometime in the future.

Best Regards to all

Oh whoa is me, you're so infinitely clever... Whatever shall I do?

Please.

"Whatever shall I do?"
Go and play something else?? Maybe something you'll enjoy more?
Something you'll have more fun with?
Isn't that the idea of playing video games..to have fun?

It'd be great to have somebody like that on board Robert,it really would.

In the meantime I Personnally trust Pat Pattles recommendations,the mans been around I believe he certainly knows what he's talking about.

I know nothing about flying planes. I'm afraid of heights, in fact. I haven't bought WOTR, and won't until I have a PC to run it. However, I do have WOFF and several other flight sims, so have some qualifications to comment. I just wish to say, if WOTR is the WWII equivalent of WOFF, it has the makings of a fine simulation of the Battle of Britain, as in being the nearest equivalent one can have of being in the battle while sitting in front of your pc. It provides that defiance of ho-hum reality by more than specific details as in an accurate flight model or whatever, but by a general attention to a whole gamut of details that combine to provide the experience. That is why it is very likely to become very popular with a lot of people that like that kind of thing. It may even put strain on some marriages.

It's kind of silly to compare WotR, that is essentially CFS3, to CloD. Comparing it to European Air War or old Il-2 is a more just comparison. Then again I find comparisons in general to be silly.

It's not there yet Skyhigh but like you say " it has the makings of a fine simulation"
I think what people may forget is..Its what 2 weeks into release? As far has I'm aware there's been no major bugs reported how many releases can say that nowadays? In fact I know of certain sims/games where updates have screwed things up. This series will undoubtedly get better and better..its what OBD does they listen,and if they can improve they will.

I'm more than happy with my purchase and most of all...I'm having fun,and personally to me,that's what matters.

I got exactly what I paid for, The WoFF experience (a tantalising taste of it) in WW2!

I agree with you Ace_Pilto. I haven't had a rig to run the newest World War II sims but I've played a lot of IL-2 1946 and if you search around, you'll find me posting over on the SAS Boards for the vpmodpack for that sim - it's a great add on for folks like me who want to bring that sim up to current spec as easily as possible. I still have Falcon BMS installed on my system and plan to revisit it soon as well. In other words, the more flight sims we have, the better. The market has been pretty niche for about twenty years now. The days of multiple sims covering the same period releasing within weeks of each other has been well and truly behind us for some time - so the more lifeblood we have going into this fantastic hobby of ours, the better.

I'm reminded of the original review I read for European Air War back in 1999 when, as a high schooler, I was trying desperately to convince my parents to buy me a World War 2 sim right on the heels of picking up Red Baron 3D. I was so determined I printed the thing off and read it out loud to them. I feel like this closing bit from IGN kind of sums up how I feel about games in general:

The list of good stuff is just as long as the bad. The force feedback is nice. Planes have a good damage model. Bombers will slowly drop out of formation, falling victim to enemy fighters. Strafe a building and soldiers will run out of it. Guns jam when fired in high-G turns (that's a new one). The communication options with your wingmen are effective, with plenty of options. In fact, even having comms in the first place is a positive; neither CFS or WW2F model it. Bombers actually have nose art. Did I mention the subwoofer sounds great? I know it seems this review had listed more bad features than good, but when you throw it all together, this game rises above itself.

We've seen one issue countless times in countless other games: Gameplay will always win out over graphics. If you want eye candy, pick up Combat Flight Simulator or World War II Fighters. If you're looking for a long-term relationship, you can't go wrong with European Air War. It's not perfect, but since when is a successful relationship not about compromise?

And this is where I feel OBD land. Is the CFS 3 engine the latest? Of course not - it's from 2002. But the things they've been able to accomplish with it has been remarkable. You are also talking about a development studio of fewer than ten people - making a full featured game from scratch. So I know going into it that there are going to be compromises - but I feel that those compromises come from the right place, with the right intent. Game development has changed immensely in the last ten years - free to play, DLC, and less-than-complete titles launch with the expectation that gamers will pony up more cash to get more game - it's a part of the market and that's the reality we live in.

But I know that a Phase 1 release of WoTR will be a fully realized campaign of the Battle of Britain with arguably two of the most historically significant aircraft of the event - Hurricane had more kills than the Spitfire (and I LOVE the Spit), and the 109E, well, it's THE fighter of the Luftwaffee's operation. And for the asking price, I think that's fair. Rather than fly online on servers - which I'm not a huge fan of - I get a campaign of the BoB a period which, for me at least, hasn't been worn out yet. (IL-2 1946 sort of gets there but not in a fully realized way and I haven't played Cliffs of Dover). The AI will be bloody difficult, the landscape will be gorgeous, there will be cascading shadows across the cockpit, and the sound design and music will be top notch. I feel that, sometimes as a community, we get so passionate about this hobby we love and what we so desperately want from it, that we get frustrated when our ideals aren't fully realized - regardless of the game. But if you take a step back and look at gaming in general - this is a pretty special place. OBD is a studio with a "done when it's done" mentality and rather than let WoTR sit as vaporware for another five years, we get a taste of it now, and my 35 bucks (or the price of a cheap sushi dinner out) I get to support a studio that cares about the people who buy their sim, who post regularly on the boards, and who will patch a game within days of a glitch appearing. And at least for me, that's a value I'm happy to partake in. Because one day, when these guys hang it up and the rest of the world has moved on to ray tracing and VR and games as a service rather than a console, I'll keep a rig somewhere in my house with WOFF:UE, Falcon 4.0, FSX, Strike Fighters, IL-2 1946, and WoTR (and European Air War if they ever get it running in Windows 10!).

Just my two cents - I've had a lot of coffee today mates, so bear with me.

I'll be heading over to that new store in a few days and picking up my copy as well. Thanks to Pol and Winder and Matt and the rest for all of their hard work.

^^ This +1. Great post Captain

I am enjoying it and really looking forward to new planes and content. What I look for in a sim is historical accuracy and play-ability. WOTR and WOFF both have it. The added bonus is a great community and great support from OBD. I've been around since the early days of OFF and feel like Pol and Winder and many others involved are old friends. I'm here to support, contribute and purchase until the end.

Blessings, CrimsonTide

Thanks for your insights gentlemen and thanks for the welcome.

Comparing one sim to another on a whole might be futile - but my questions were specific for a reason: I asked to compare the fm and dm to CLOD because I enjoyed flying the Emil in that game very much. I never flew a plane in real live - and I only know from written accounts how such a fighter should behave. And anyone who tried to find out how a wwii plane should behave by reading knows: the authors disagree to the extreme. Alone the question weither the 109 outturns a spit or vice versa will be answered in both ways by both sides. (Galland voted Spit, Mölders 109 for example)
So the question was asked to know wether I'd feel at home in the wotr cockpits immediatly or if I had to relearn the aircraft.

From what you told I conclude the FM will differ from clod very notably.

Concerning campaign and ai: bob2wov did a way better job than clod- but it is not running under windows 10 and the graphics- though acceptable is way behind wotr.
Comparisons to woff don't help me unfortunatly since I didn't play it. nevertheless all you told me sounds awesome.
However since you guys obviously didn't play bob2 I will specify my questions:
Does AI use historic formations? (Close/later wide vic for RAF, 4 finger for german fighters and V for german bombers?)
What size can the engagements have? And how well does the pc handle the bigger ones?
What impact has the player on the course of the campaign? (For comparison: in bob2 the raf player could coordinate the whole defence of the isle while german player could plan every single raid. Airfields hit by successfull raids would be out of order for some time and so on.)
What influence has the player on allies in the air? What is the largest formation that could be lead by the player?

Once again looking forward to your opinion

One last word: I believe most of you reading this subforum think of wotr as a great game and I in no way want to challenge that view. All I'm trying to figure out is wether or not wotr is the right game for me to invest my time. (All of you who have/had two little children propably know how rare a resource time can become )

WoTR suits my limited time situation very well. There is an air start option so you can fly a career mission in a very short time, if you're on your way home and suddenly don't have time to land you can actually end the mission there and then and it will apply the results. This isn't how I like to play at all, but it it is very helpful in a small child environment.

Hi Mates,

Been through the whole thread. WOFF, and now WOTR is not comparable, cause there is nothing else out there equally to it.

But if you really wanna do so, stay the Timeline of these sims. Cfs3-EAW-il2 (Not the expansions, just the first one) that will be fair.

I enjoy(ed) CLOD a lot, and to be honest, it is barely playable on a vanilla installation. Team Fusion did a Great job for patching clod up.

But its not comparable to cfs3 or Eaw .

Another Thing in this discussion, Is asking for real flight experience. Why? No one here ever experienced a ride in a 1000hp fivehundredsomething kmph fast Wood/metal early warbird. And flying in todays cessnas or pipers is not the same. Those chaps, brave and honorable men, who propably vould,are gone, mostly.

Perhaps you should ask Pat_Pattle - after all, that's who raised the point to begin with. Seemed to think it mattered, even though others here - like yourself - have doubted it matters. But he did raise the question.

Interesting...Adger trusts him, because he's "been around". He raises the question about flying in a real Hurricane (as if to imply it matters), yet ever since, people keep asking why it should matter.

Heck, he's the one who apparently felt it matters, not me or anyone else. But he's been around, which is evidently a trustworthy credential of itself.

So, let's see:

• Someone starts a thread asking for comparisons.
• Space_Ghost posts a few not-so-flattering perspectives (but which are his own observations, and which were requested by the OP).
• Several others also posted their perspectives.
• Pat_Pattle then asks Space_Ghost if he's ever flown a real hurricane. (Although it's not absolute, it would certainly seem the point of this would be to somehow discredit aforementioned less-than-flattering perspectives.)
• I then asked if Pat_Pattle meant that it was necessary to have experience in a real Hurricane to have an opinion on the sim, and therefore whether others who had posted opinions would also require said experience.
• Then, various posters began saying you can't compare real life to the sim, and it doesn't matter whether you have flown a Hurricane, because the sim is a game and it's about fun. (OK, sure. But then, there was only one person who actually brought up about flying a real life Hurricane...so, if it doesn't matter, why'd it get brought up?)
• Later on, someone says they trust the person who brought up what apparently doesn't matter, based on general worldly experience.

OK...

General worldly experience apparently makes a trustworthy opinion concerning a flight sim, but actual flight experience apparently does not. (Fair enough, but does make one wonder why real life experience was asked about, as such)

And even though many in this thread don't feel as if real flight experience is any basis for objective observation about the sim, that very point was raised by the trusted person with general worldly experience. (Which means...hmm...we should trust someone who raises a question that doesn't matter...?)

Hmm. I dunno. Seems rather...circular. To me anyway.

But, hey, what do I know?

You guys are more fun than flying ever was. (Yes, the real-life kind).

No sim compares to real flying, they're all garbage compared to the real thing. Better off simulating the world and the player's place in it than obsessing over graphics, physics and guestimated engine management/avionics. WoFF /WoTR gets the true meaning of simulation down in spades. It simulates the experience of survival. THat's why it stands head and shoulders over supposedly "superior" "sims" for me.

Well, again, I suppose this refers back to the person who started the 'real Hurricane' bit. So...I guess what you're saying is that maybe it's not a good idea to trust the one who brought up real-life flying...? (Just a guess, mind you)

BTW I think I could name a few organizations that would take exception to your opinion about the 'true meaning' of simulation. The US Navy and NASA come to mind. But I guess they wouldn't know anything about the 'true' meaning of simulations, after all they only use simulators to train for the likelihood of life-or-death experiences...nothing at all to compare to a computer game.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I pursued flight sims because quite bluntly I couldn't afford the real-life hobby.

Even though I know first hand they're not the same thing, I still look for a certain level of fidelity and comparison to the real thing...we all do, else we could all just as soon be playing a train simulator.

Wow.

Thanks - agreed. That is not the best way to experience such a sim, but having that option is terrific when time is an issue!

Eisenfaust,
To your questions. The RAF uses a V formation. I have not flown for the Germans much so can"t really say. With the RAF your missions will either be scramble or patrol. Either one can be either 1 or 2 flights consisting of 6 or 7 planes each. If your squadron gets beat up and your replacement pilots and machines have not arrived this number could be less.

As far as size of engagements, I have run into a few 109's, a lone bomber trying to get home or a lot. Usually, there will be a flight of 3 to 5 bombers escorted by 110's or 109's. I turned on the labels one time and there were a lot of Stuka's below but I don't know how many. There also can be another fight going on a few miles away with another squadron. You can see them if you turn on labels but if you do not use them you will never know they were there. I would dare say , as I have never counted, there could be 20 machines in your immediate vicinity. More than you can cope with anyway.

I have a pretty robust machine so mine has handled everything smooth as silk once I got everything dialed in. OBD has made it easy to adjust your graphics to get things to run smooth.

The players really can only impact his squadron. Keep your guys out of trouble and alive and they get better with time. Not sure how long airfields stay out once bombed but I did make a dead stick landing at an airfield that had just been bombed, I had no choice, and went arse over tea kettle in a bomb crater.

The largest formation you will lead is your flight. I start as a lowly pilot and work my way up so it might be some time before I lead a flight. You can however enlist with some rank and you will be leading a flight, up to 7 planes, straight away. Or you can check "always lead" if you want to suspend reality a bit.

I hope this has answered your questions. Hope to see you in the skies soon.
Mark

What impact has the player on the course of the campaign? (For comparison: in bob2 the raf player could coordinate the whole defence of the isle while german player could plan every single raid. Airfields hit by successfull raids would be out of order for some time and so on.)

- Not in WOTR. Airfields, including your own will be fully functional with all buildings intact the next mission even if all buildings/runways were destroyed. I can only comment on the mission file which is auto-generated. That is why JJJ is working on a mission editor which will enable you to alter a few things in the mission, but no effect on the overall course of the campaign for other airfields. No control over the fate of other airfields or campaign. WOTR only keeps track of your squadron and the impact of the war on it during the course of the campaign.

Every time I read your dribble I think “agenda.” So what is yours? What are your trying to prove besides me wishing SimHQ had a “Ignore” function.

View profile,click ignore.

You're a grown man, I think you're going to be alright.

And done. Thank you.

I just don't understand what your point is? You said you got a refund. Are you trying to make the game better? I don't think this approach is going to work. Are you just trying to be snarky? Sometimes that is fun, but I don't know if that is what you are going for. You've raised some reasonable points in the past, I think that the automatic prop pitch for the BF 109 is something that could be done if you suggest it in the technical forum. This sim is based on CFS3. That's the engine they have to work with. They have done good things with it so far, and I hope for more in the future but some things are going to be out of reach. I happen to like where they lean to on the flying sim/pilot experience sim side of the line. I generally agree with the statement for their other game: 'If you want to know what it is like to fly world war I planes, fly ROF. If you want to know what it is like to fly planes in WWI, fly WOFF". An over-simplification, but it is a reasonable approximation of what the situation is, I feel.

I am a pilot and WoTR's FM feels fine to me. Does it accurately simulate the behavior of real-world flying? No. Do CLoD, IL-2, and other sims accurately simulate the behavior of real-world flying? No. Not even close.

But they all feel close enough to the real thing, and that's good enough for a computer game.

Much has been written in this thread. I've been playing flight sims since I bought JET for my 8088 Leading Edge back in the mid-1980s. Hell, I even suffered through THE BLUE MAX piece of crap game.

You an talk FMs, exterior graphics, cockpit graphics, ground, sky, clouds, sounds, etc. You can talk about the AI.

For me, these products are entertainment. And I judge them simply. How often and how long do I keep playing them? I think my Son gave me an early version of WOFF as a Christmas present something like ten years ago or so. And it's been on my PCs ever since! And I keep playing, with occasional breaks because of RL.

I had IL2. I had EAW. I had BoB. And RoF. Yea, you could argue that ths game or that had better whatevers. But WOFF is what I still play. And I expect the same from WOTR, which is why I bought it.

+1
I have exactly the same feeling and experience, Nowi. The only difference I got WOFF as christmas present from my son at 2014?

I generally don’t get involved in discussions like this, but I feel compelled to agree with Nowi. I have had OFF on my PC since 2012 and I have had many hundreds of hours of flight time on the sim, my wife can attest to this, and expect to enjoy it for years to come along with WOTR. An additional plus is the level of Support that I have received from the OBD team. It exceeds exceptional.
Also I have my Private Pilot License and I agree that no sim is like actually flying, but for pure long term entertainment in a flight sim nothing beats WOFF and I have every reason to expect the same from WOTR.

A perfect summing up of flight sims, thank you Nickerbocker!

I don't think that comparing WOTR to any other sim/game is fair to either the game or the developers. Every different sim has it's strong points and it's weaknesses. I think that what the developers have managed to do with WOTR being based on a 16 year old sim is phenomenal! The graphics while not perfect are very good. I think that the gameplay is excellent. You will never have a sim with the "feel" of flight unless you can afford a true full motion simulator, but the flight dynamics of WOTR are quite good. In the end it all boils down to whether you enjoy the sim or not. I enjoy it very much and consider it money well spent!

Ditto, it's academic to argue which bad representation of flying is the best. It only needs to be good enough to feel right. There is so much dynamic motion in flying a real plane that becoming obsessed with the simulating the physics of it only make your game run horribly slow due to the insurmountable challenge of attempting to encode all of that data and somehow stuff it into a game. Then you have the physical sensations that are simply impossible to recreate unless you have a few million dollarydoos to build a motion platform which will still be inadequate compared to reality. This obsession with unachievable fidelity leaves no room for what is really important, the world and the context. I didn't buy WoTR expecting a physics simulator, I bought it expecting a broader experience of what is involved in surviving the day to day operations of a large scale war where I am constantly in peril, to look out of the cockpit and see history playing out before me one day at a time.

So, everyone seems to agree that real-life flying doesn't necessarily equate to sim playing. I would concur, broadly and generally. And I have flown, as well as had military simulator training and experience.

It's just a little troubling that, back a few pages in this thread, someone felt the need to bring up whether another had actually flown a real Hurricane.

If everyone seems to agree there's no real connection, then why would that question ever be asked?

Later on, a different person commented they trusted the person who asked about real-life flying, because they'd "been around".

Not sure I understand why we should trust someone who asks a question if the consensus is that real-life flying isn't an appropriate comparison. Nor does it seem to make sense why having 'been around' is the standard.

I"d really like to think we're all intelligent enough to see the issue with this. Especially if you're at all concerned with the new people - potential customers, mind you - who might wander through here and see this.

But, like I said above...what do I know?

Are we having fun yet? So much trash. Let's go play. It's only a game!
BadBud

May I ask what you're referring to as "So much trash"?

You STILL bringing this up? Your making yourself look silly you really are. How about firing up the sim and you know..try to have some fun?

You post about the same topic over and over and to me..its quite boring. Your like a dog with a bone..its embarrassing If youv,e a problem with somebodys comment then..PM them?

Like i said go and have some fun instead of watching WOTR videos at quarter speed? to pick out "faults" seriously you need to find some fun in your life KKsnowbear

EDIT: And yes in the world of SIMULATIONS\GAMES and that's what were talking about. Thats what this is a bloody video game all said and done. i "Trust" Pats call for his work and dedication and time spent with CFS3 code..because he,s been around. If he,s happy with the sim then I trust his call.
Bloody ell man..fire up the sim and enjoy instead of "trying to pick the meat off the bones of everything"

I explained about the video reviews, and that was posted as requested by RJW to help identify a problem.

I even specifically said that no one should jump me because I wasn't doing it to find fault, just to try and help solve a problem that originally Wodin reported. But I guess it's asking too much to not be attacked for posting details that were requested.

As might be expected, insults and attacks.

Its not about the posting of details,and dont start going on about insults and attacks.

You have posted what 4 times? on this thread regarding about what people have said? like i said if YOUV,E a problem with what Pat,s commented about then why not PM him. Ive explained why i trust his call is that ok with you?
You might not agree with my "judgement" but..i dont care. Its mine to make

I came to give advice on this thread which i did (even Space Ghost did) you seem like you want to "Witch" hunt somebody or "debunk" them if thats the right word. Like i said fire up the sim and enjoy.
Regards Adger

Insults and attacks are exactly what's happening. You might not agree with my judgement, but just as you put it, I don't care.

And you're also completely wrong about the posting of details. RJW asked for details, I provided what was requested. That's what is was, that's all it was. It certainly seems you want to turn it into something it's not.

BTW if we apply your reasoning then if Pat had issue with whether Space Ghost had flown a Hurricane, then why couldn't he just PM?

It's really not so hard to see why.

Where did Robert ask for video evidence? He said and i quote "Yes, it may be aircraft specific so more details would be great." Nowhere did he ask you to watch WOTR vids at quarter speed and report back or did he?. Ive helped countless people on this\the WOFF and other forum sites providing links to pages Sweetfx settings,ive gifted aircraft in other sims but to watch a vid at quarter speed? I don,t like anyone that much ..thats just madness

Dont start with the " It certainly seems you want to turn it into something it's not." Its YOU thats got the issue regarding Pats comment,no-one else..you.
Ive explained all that i need to. I apologize to the OP for going "Off" topic ive said my peace. I wont respond anymore.We will just agree to disagree.

"BTW if we apply your reasoning then if Pat had issue with whether Space Ghost had flown a Hurricane, then why couldn't he just PM?

It's really not so hard to see why." Your Quote.

And heres my answer. What you asking me for ASK Pat? Im not the one who bought up and continues to bring up this "issue" so why ask me?

Regards Adger

RJW asked for details. The videos are accessible to anyone, and they show exactly what Wodin was talking about. No need to wait for someone to reproduce it, post more video, or anything else. I already explained that quarter speed wasn't how I watched it to see the issues initially, right there in the same post. You're completely fabricating that. How about stop putting words in my mouth?

TBH it's really unfortunate you're trying to contort it into something it isnt.

Space_Ghost is a defender of all things BOS/BOM/BOX related. Since this is a competing product...my guess is he's doing his part to try and take it down a notch. Just IMO of course.

True enough. Of course it's just as true that nothing was ever improved by ignoring what could be better

Hey gents, didn't want to start a fight. Read once on some other forum never to ask fm questions... now I see why

Never the less I believe adults can compare fms from different sims and stating which they prefer and why without hurt feelings. If one feels more accurate/realistic/fun or whatever to one person and another sees it different great! A matter of taste! That should not be source of conflict...

And to real life pilots telling "all sims are wrong so I don't care for fm as long as it's OKish and the rest of the game is great!" - valid point of view. Mine is different - I don't know how flying a real plane is and most likely never will. So the more a game makes me feel I'm flying the better - even if it's still far from the real thing.
I on the other was platoon leader in the mechanized infantry. I can tell you any game trying to simulate being part of a military unit, leading men in a combat situation, feeling the fatigue of ongoing military operation or simply shooting a gun fails just as much if not worse than any flightsim. That doesn't mean of course that a good try can't be enjoyable as a game.

However those posts that actually tried to answer my questions helped a lot - thank you very much. I now have a better idea what to expect and I'm less excited than before but still enough to give it a try next month. I'd rather go into a new game with a realistic expectations than being disappointed. Looking forward to the experience.

The first rule of FM Club is: You do not talk about FM Club.
The second rule of FM Club is: You do not talk about FM Club

No in all seriousness pal,go with your gut feeling. Other sims may have a "better" (a subjective word) feeling of flight but the Ai and campaign in some of the other sims are woeful IMO.
This is just the start and already the AI here is incredible,the campaign is excellent and i believe will only get better and better when more craft\phases become available.
I think the point youv,e made regarding You being a platoon leader is what pilots are trying to make pal..It.s "Never" going to be the same. But as long has it,s enjoyable then great

Anyway take care
Best Regards
Adger

Eisenfaust, glad to hear you will give it a go! Look forward to hearing your after action report.

FM's, comparisons, "Can the P-51 kill tanks by bouncing .50 caliber rounds off of a road surface and penetrating the underside?" These are the cans of worms ye shall never open on a forum.

Everyone is an expert.

Indeed.

So I decided to compare a couple of sims to see if I agree with myself. ( I often don't...) So I loaded back up IL2 Cliffs of Dover to give it a whirl. Now, see, I have had CLoD for years but it never stays on my hard drive because...well, for me, there is nothing really to do. It's very similar to Rise of Flight, which I really wanted to like, but again, is not on my hard drive. CLoD has two canned campaigns and a handful of missions that are not very easy to modify. Basically, the only way I could make a comparison video was to find a mission in CLoD that already existed and then I was able to easily reproduce the key elements of it in WOTR. So I have a link to the private video, I don't want people to stumble on it without going through this thread. I believe the link will work, let me know if it doesn't, I've never done a video this way before...

https://youtu.be/hj_jq1D7LB0

Google link:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1uc84MaeFLqFz1r_TaZ9dblMu77p7ggHO

Thoughts:
Graphics: CLoD wins, but not by as much as I would have thought as I went back to it. There's obviously a lot more animated on the plane, more on that in a bit. Still, the WOTR cockpits are nice and clean and I don't seem to miss what's not there when I am flying it. I think individual ground objects in CLoD don't have that much more detail to them, but draw distance is much greater. Surprisingly, there was still some cloud pop in. There are definitely some shader work and effects that really make the CLoD graphics "pop" over WOTR and I am wondering if DX11 ever shows up in WOTR, how much that lead will be cut. Again though, WOTR show improvement over WOFF with regards to explosions and tracers and damage modelling (visually) and I like the improvements.

Flight Experience: I am not a pilot but I have flown commercially a lot and flown many flight sims, so I can only speak from those limited experiences. I was able to get around in both sims, although it took me a bunch of missions in each to get the feel for them as I am not really all that familiar with engine management and all the ins and outs that go with it. There's a lot more feedback from CLoD in terms of shakes and shudders and whatnot than there is in WOTR (such as the wind rushing through your ears when the canopy is open, Pol!) to warn you of impending doom, and WOTR is more forgiving of pilot error absent those feedback mechanisms. Overall the CLoD flight model was "bouncier" and the WOTR was natively smoother, but in both cases the aircraft did what I expected them to do. Increase throttle, go up, stick left, go left etc. It's easier to seize the engine in CLoD through rough use, and I haven't seen how that is modeled in WOTR (if it is). The clickable cockpit in CLoD is nice if you forget the key to press, but the shortcuts in WOTR seem more granular. I found myself having to go to the clickable cockpit in CLoD to get the settings I wanted sometimes. I hope that the engine management can be dialed in a little more in WOTR as I find it a fun thing to fiddle with, even as I am swearing at the monitor in fury as I go down with a cooked engine... The AI seemed reasonable in both (um, ignore my wingman who just had to stay in formation in CLoD), although they were pretty limited engagements to be sure. OBD has a good track record with me for creating interesting AI that is much more challenging than the standard, especially with their tendency to team up on you and then break for home when things go south. There are clearly multiple systems that can be damaged in both, as seen by the video. On the WOTR section, I sustained early rudder damage that made lining up the shots ( and safely ditching) quite a challenge. Obviously, the cracked windscreen in CLoD flight offered a different kind of challenge...

Gameplay Experience: This is pretty much where I get off. There's just not much for me to do in CLoD and much like RoF, I'm sure it will fall off my hard drive in a few weeks. I just am not interested in short on-line skirmishes and I don't have a good schedule for larger co-ordinated multiplayer engagements. Now, if team fusion whips up a good semi-dynamic campaign, I'll plop down my cash and be thrilled as Lou Rawls fans at a Lou Rawls concert, but as it currently stands, WOTR is where it is for me. I can just jump into my pilot, take off, shoot stuff and try to make it through the war, knowing that every engagement will be different and every career will be like a new game. As OBD adds new planes and new phases, I look forward to a lot of fun and hopefully even better graphics and flight models!

I don't know if that helped at all, it was interesting to try them both out side be side... If you are not as interested as I am in the long term career mode, maybe one of the other offerings will have what you want. I of course want everything, and with chocolate ice cream...

Thank you Rick - very interesting insights! Unfortunately the video doesn't work (or I'm doing it wrong). I would like to watch it!

CLOD doesn't offer much for the SP guy - very true. There are some usermade missions and campaigns and a kind of dynamic thing by enlightened florist - but nothing comparable to what wotr seems to offer. There was a third party developer offering lots of well made scripted campaigns that have a good reputation but his side seems to be down and I only got a demo - but they seemed to be quite enjoyable. No Idea where to get them now though.

That's why I'm looking for alternatives

The video isn't available Rick.

His post sums up the long and the short of it for me. I've had the same experiences, or very similar. I can only imagine that the video more or less confirms what Rick wrote.

heh, well, since you can't see it, I can definitely say that one thing the the video does prove that I am the greatest virtual pilot of all time, and by a long shot! I'll edit this post in with a google drive link as soon as it uploads. If anyone knows how the whole private video thing works on youtube, let me know and I will fix that as well...

edit: Google link:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1uc84MaeFLqFz1r_TaZ9dblMu77p7ggHO

Guys, cool down please, although we try our best, it is just a PC flight simulator.
It is not perfect., and neither is all the other sims. Its very easy to find faults and hangon those.


Thanks Force10.

Hmm, I made it unlisted, see if you can watch it now...

I just wanted to revisit this because I have simply had so much fun so far. I have never smiled so much at virtual dogfights as I have in WoTR.

I thought I saw my wingman go down the other day in a collision, he was spinning down to the ground... but no, I found him shortly after I tangled with another enemy, and he was heading home, albeit struggling to control his aircraft.I actually cared!

Your fellow airmen help you, and rapidly so. Calling for assistance works, and it is beautiful to see your assistance scything down on the bandit chasing you.

I have also grown to love the graphics in their own way, especially the clouds which I originally found a bit 'different'.

I am very much looking forward to the next phase.

Great points! There are also effects in WOTR that I greatly prefer over CLoD, such as the wounding effect. Even for the work to be done, nice touches abound. Re-watching the video above, I had forgotten about the flack shooting down the 110 as I made my initial climb-out...

I think both WOTR and CLoD have their virtues, and I would never forget to mention BoB II Wings of Victory - which, if you haven't considered, I also would highly recommend trying. My own short summary would be as follows:

(1) IL-2 Cliffs of Dover (Blitz Edition) - the only one with multiplayer, it has probably the best flight models, and certainly does the best of the three at modeling the nuances of the controls (esp. engine controls) of the aircraft it models. The selection of aircraft is slightly larger than the others. The graphics are best of the three - though arguably just by a notch, and most of its advantages are purely technical (it has an engine with fancier shaders and features like 3D grass). It runs very well even on fairly high settings (this was not true of IL-2 CLOD as originally released, but the Blitz edition is a huge improvement). Main downsides are the very limited singleplayer content, especially since the third-party Desastersoft campaigns add on is no longer available or supported. The AI is a bit lackluster, and at least as of writing, there are annoyances like bomber gunners that are way too accurate and effective. It is a great time in multiplayer - and covers some historical ground that the others don't touch (like the Battle of France, the Dunkirk evacuation, and night bombing/night fighting during the Blitz).
In short, it is a pretty smooth sim with really good aircraft and flight models, best enjoyed in multiplayer.

(2) BoB II Wings of Victory - this one has a dynamic campaign that is definitely the most advanced on a strategic level; indeed, you can actually play this one as a pure strategy game, commanding the whole war effort without ever actually flying an aircraft. Although the engine is quite aged (on par with WOTR's CFS3 engine), it still looks quite good. In the hands of an officially-supported community group, patch support for it had gone on long after release. It has some very good details in scenery, and an incredible variety of skins for aircraft (last I checked, hundreds and hundreds of unique historical skins). Its greatest advantage by far, though, is the sheer number of aircraft the engine can handle - actually, more than any other sim since European Air War. A "large" bomber raid in IL-2 CLOD (and mostly in WOTR as well) means a couple dozen bombers at most. A large raid in BoB II WOV is 300-400 aircraft - absolutely huge! And it actually handles it pretty smoothly. The flight models are good, the AI is very good (I wouldn't put it over WOTR's, but it's better and more human-like than anything in IL-2 series games). Its main downsides are its age and a campaign that can get a bit technical and impresonal.
In short, it's a great choice if you're interested in the "big picture" of Battle of Britain combat and want to see huge formations - and are less interested in the personal detail. IMO, it's a sim that everybody at least needs to try though!

(3) Wings over the Reich - as others have said, if you want a more focused individual pilot/squadron experience, this one's a great go to! In many respects, for me it seems to sit in between the other titles, and that's not a bad thing: the CFS3 engine shows its age, although OBD's updates have pushed it a little further in terms of looks than BoB II. It doesn't look quite as good or run quite as smooth as IL-2 CLOD on similar settings, but it makes up for purely technical finesse with some very good design - here and in WOFF, I've always enjoyed the handcrafted look of the terrain and atmosphere. It might not draw individual blades of grass, but from high up the terrain "feels" really naturalistic, and down low you get some lovely details like livestock and fences (on second thought... I hate fences! ) The flight models - personally, I actually really like them, with a few caveats (there are a few odd behaviours here and there). I especially like how this game treats the Hurricane - at least subjectively, it feels like it reflects all the operational limitations of the aircraft that you read about in literature. I would still have to put IL-2 CLOD over it in terms of things like detailed controls and instrumentation. The AI is definitely the best in business - other than WOFF (but give it time and I'm sure it'll be tweaked to the same level of refinement). It doesn't handle nearly as many aircraft in-mission as BoB II, but somewhat more than IL-2 CLOD typically does.
In short, it provides a more personal perspective - if you just want to play as a single pilot in a squadron, it's a great choice. The campaign system is very good, the AI is excellent, and it keeps you firmly "in character".

I don't think there's any "bad choice" among the three, to be honest, nor one that completely "knocks out" the others in every respect. Any one of them deserves to be somebody's favourite - it just depends on personal preferences, and what the player is actually looking to get from the experience

CCIP, Very nice comparison. I enjoy all three, each with their own strengths. I'm very lucky to have three fine BoB sims to choose from.

BOB II WOV ( and predecessor Mig Alley) are my all time favorites. Unfortunately, BOB II seems to have issues running under Windows 10 for me and others.

Seconded.....excellent review.

Luckily not being at the bleeding edge of technology I still have a system running windows 7. If what the last respondent said was correct , no reason to think not,...i'll be keeping a system running windows 7 as part of the new expanding computer sector. We have Vintage Cars why not Vintage Computer Systems.

With a plethora of sims showcasing the campaign of BOB and or modelling the aircraft; the last respondent has also highlighted the bitter sweetness that is Wings Over The Reich. It should have been.... Wings Over Korea !!!

Tim

(P.S. not a thread-jack just a personal observation )

Very well written, CCIP. I think exactly the same and keep on my HD the same sims.

Thanks CCIP - very interesting comparison! The windows 10 incompatibility of BOB2WOV bothers me very much, since my desktop pc that still had windows 7 has hardware problems and my laptop only runs windows 10... A pitty - a fantastic sim!

After a little trouble setting up the sim, that were solved by the faq and polovski in this forum I had my first flight and my first dogfight in WOTR.

First I have to say: I find Space_Ghost's criticism despite his provocative style valid. The flight model feels sometimes weird if you are used to other sims. Especially the rudder (as was mentioned in this forum more then once already) feels very diffrent. The slip ball indicator behaves inpredictable and when I try to "step on the ball" to coordinate the flight it doesn't have the expected impact on the ball and the plane starts to turn unbanked. Also the change from speed to altitude and vice versa as well as stalling and stall behaviour feel more natural in both clod and bob2wov.

That said - it was far from terrible won't stop me from enjoying the game.

Graphically it looked better than I expected and for me it clearly beats BOB2WOV - though it is behind CLOD. But getting this look from such an old engine? Awesome!

Ok after the first take offs and aerobatics to set up controls and get used to the new FM I did a quick scenario - escorting some He-111 attacking cargo shipping.

After a wild chase after my flight leader (engine management feels off in the Emil as well) we flew close escort for the bombers until one calls out "Indianer, 11 Uhr hoch!". Radio chatter with it's static sounds is great and very atmospheric! The swarm climbs to intercept the interceptors - spits reluctant to give up their energy advantage, 109s content with keeping them away from the bombers - both sides actively trying to get into killing position/avoiding being killed - ok, ai is very good. I kept a little away from the dogfight - gaining altitude, watching the dogfight and the bombers. The spits draw the emils away from the bombers - on purpose? If so - good job, because a few hurricanes descent upon the bombers. I attack a hurricane that flies away from the bombers in a straight line. Expected it to turn around for a second pass or evade me if it saw me - did neither... Hit by a gunner? Not sure - gave it a short burst - wing rips apart and the pilot immediatly hangs on his chute as if he was ready there just waiting for the plane to disappear around him... That actually looked a bit odd and I almost rammed the poor fellow...

First kill (in campaign noone would have confirmed it I guess) - I turn around and see noone... So I fly back to the cargo ships to see if I can do anything more... a spit passes me in straight line on her way back to the isle - to far for a kill, yet she didn't see me. I try to catch her but I can't - a wild machine gun burst to have her start maneuvering so I can catch her - she does the right thing and ignores me...

Checking my six and see another spit sneaking up on me - nice try! Start a dogfight with the spit doing good maneuvers, but I land a snapshot that seemed to have hurt, because afterwards I have a good pass on her six - now she is definitly seriously damaged. Can't see anything but she gets slow and lumbering. A third pass and she breaks into peaces - second kill that would definatly stay unconfirmed... But that was a fun dogfight! Now back to france - eavding the coastal flak. (which looks great and is accurate enough to make me feel in danger) Motor starts to stutter... Did I kill the engine because I haven't mastered WOTR engine management yet? Was I hit by the spit or the flak and didn't notice? Is it random engine failure? Checking the fuel clock - enough left - ok so engine broken for wathever reason and I'm to low to glide all the way back to France. So I go as far as I can and thought this a good moment to see how emergency watering is simulated. I liked it! Coming to a halt 300m away from the french coast and the plane started to sink slowly. I guess I would have made it back to friednly forces...

So conclusion: In my opinion the sim still needs a lot of work - but from what I saw so far on this forum I believe that the devs will work hard to imrpove it.

Yet I already had lots of fun in this single mission without any context and look forward to try the campaign that is advertised as one of the two major selling points of this sim - the other one (ai) seems to be great already!