"They" deleted my thread regarding last dev blog

[Tvrdi]

And all what I was sayin is what they said in the blog...game will be very limited regarding No of objects and units which can be used in MP due to performance issues. And that we will not have custom video settings withing game GUI (which we had until this update). Custom video settings is present in almost every game and sim. This, in practice, means, on example, that you will not be able to turn off SSAO (resource hog) with very high preset setting. Not to mention al the fine tunings. Now, its questionable if the config ini would be locked in future.

[ChiefRedCloud]

Who deleted your thread?

[9./JG52_J-HAT]

They, the invisible forum hand of BoS.
I read they were proposing reducing to 50km the radius for objects to load. Was the deletion after they wrote that?

[ATAG_Slipstream]

Hahaha,

And people wonder why some of us don't pre-order. They treat the people who put food on their tables like idiots.

I'm not a sheep and thus I don't need a shepherd.

Good luck to those who do.

[LuseKofte]

I am not a sheep but I pre ordered. I think personally that is up to everyone. I have not put any in dcs I dont call anyone that did a sheep.

[ATAG_Colander]

I am not a sheep but I pre ordered. I think personally that is up to everyone. I have not put any in dcs I dont call anyone that did a sheep.

Good point Jaeger. I think Slip was not trying to attack any one but it can be read like that.

[LuseKofte]

I have quit discussing BOS in here. I just got the feeling being looked upon as a dumbass when saying I like what I see in the LAGG. And slipstreams remark is allowed because of the general opinion in here. So I just want to say, what about us that like this site and love CLOD but in the same time are positive towards Rof and BOS. We got to shut up every damn site we visit. Because in other forums CLOD people are regarded as the devils themselves

[ATAG_Slipstream]

I have quit discussing BOS in here. I just got the feeling being looked upon as a dumbass when saying I like what I see in the LAGG. And slipstreams remark is allowed because of the general opinion in here. So I just want to say, what about us that like this site and love CLOD but in the same time are positive towards Rof and BOS. We got to shut up every damn site we visit. Because in other forums CLOD people are regarded as the devils themselves

Take it easy Jaeger.

All I was saying is that I don't like the way paying customers are treated in that forum.

There is no "general opinion" in here, we are all flight simmers and there are many people here that I know and get on with that have pre-ordered BoS.
But this place is about freedom of speech and I was just remarking on what I observe and I don't like the fact that paying customers have threads deleted if they say anything that isn't liked by the watchers.

The last think I intended was to insult anyone.

:salute:

[LuseKofte]

Im on a 12 hourshift night in a barge subzero -19 degree snowy and windy. I might have overreacted. Sorry

[ATAG_Slipstream]

Im on a 12 hourshift night in a barge subzero -19 degree snowy and windy. I might have overreacted. Sorry

That's ok Jaeger, totally understandable.

Besides I realised when I read back my comment that it could be taken the wrong way, although it was not intended like that.

:salute:

[ATAG_NakedSquirrel]

They said they are simplifying the graphics to try and make the game 'fair' as well, but I agree that features like AA, and SSAO shouldn't be touched. I'd rather allow players to modify graphics however they like. If you want a shitty looking game just for a slight hope of spotting an enemy aircraft, go for it. It's silly to think that all players are too stupid to mess around with graphics settings. If I didnt want to mess around with my machine and my game settings, I would have bought an X-box ffs.

AI numbers might be limited. It's impossible to tell without having access to an ME. They didn't mention much about it in the update other than the 'freeze' feature.

The reason RoF is limited is because every object that can shoot is an aiming entity out to roughly 500-1000m. The AI do not lock on to a single target, instead they keep track of all targets in range. So you can have over 100 machine guns spread out 500m from each other in a line and you won't have any issue as they shoot at each other, but if you put 100 mg in a 500m radius, they will all target each other.

AKA instead of 100 machine guns targeted you have 100,000 entities targeted.

This is the same for aircraft gunners and pilots.

The 50km radius will be useful for SP, but they need to revise the AI code to make any real progress. Aiming entities are resource hogs.

But non aiming entities are worth nothing to the CPU. I've put over 500 trucks on the map in RoF with no issue.

The 'freeze' of AI entities might be a useful tool, especially if it can be improved to calculate flight routes and engagements instead of having to calculate all of the aiming and ballistics. I'm fairly sure that's what games like BMS do, and I've seen ARMA modes use similar 'dumb' ai tracking to manage insane amounts of units on servers.

[LuseKofte]

I got a few warnings in BOS forum because of my direct way of comunicate. I am aware that all I say can and will be seen as hostile by many.
I was sure the admins on that site was not part of the dev team, but more kind of amateurs like me.
Anyway if I can do fmb work in there by IL 2 standard with enough objects. I will be happy.
I do not like the most common word lately about this sim "simplifyed"
I need a feeling of resistance when I fly, so I can fool myself to believe I actually can fly that damn thing. I get that in the LAGG but the 109 give me a creepy arcade feel. I give a damn about the money I put into it , I will be very dissapointed if I end up disliking it. I simply cannot have too many ww2 sims

[Skoshi_Tiger]

I know the maps aren't populated yet, but so far using High settings I've got fairly good frame rates at 1680x1050. I'm quite impressed that there is no stutter going through plumes of smoke. As soon as they get their act into gear and fix up some of the "minor" issues I might be able to put some more time into it.

[Chivas]

As much as I don't like some censorship, I wish some of the negative spamming of COD, had been deleted. It might have given the developers a few more months breathing room, instead of fueling the politicking in the IC backrooms to change developers. I would have prefer BOS found it funding elsewhere.

[ATAG_Slipstream]

As much as I don't like some censorship, I wish some of the negative spamming of COD, had been deleted. It might have given the developers a few more months breathing room, instead of fueling the politicking in the IC backrooms to change developers. I would have prefer BOS found it funding elsewhere.

Never has anyone said so much in so few words!

Exactly my feelings Chivas.

[Skoshi_Tiger]

as much as i don't like some censorship, i wish some of the negative spamming of cod, had been deleted. It might have given the developers a few more months breathing room, instead of fueling the politicking in the ic backrooms to change developers. I would have prefer bos found it funding elsewhere.

qft!

[Quax]

Tvrdis only agenda is spamming the forum with things he has no clue of (object limitation f.e.). MP is off topic at the moment anyhow.

BTW, i got a ban myself. It was up to the moderators. I accept, that they try to keep the forum a better place than banana was.

[9./JG52 Ziegler]

They said they are simplifying the graphics to try and make the game 'fair' as well, but I agree that features like AA, and SSAO shouldn't be touched. I'd rather allow players to modify graphics however they like. If you want a shitty looking game just for a slight hope of spotting an enemy aircraft, go for it. It's silly to think that all players are too stupid to mess around with graphics settings. If I didnt want to mess around with my machine and my game settings, I would have bought an X-box ffs.

AI numbers might be limited. It's impossible to tell without having access to an ME. They didn't mention much about it in the update other than the 'freeze' feature.

The reason RoF is limited is because every object that can shoot is an aiming entity out to roughly 500-1000m. The AI do not lock on to a single target, instead they keep track of all targets in range. So you can have over 100 machine guns spread out 500m from each other in a line and you won't have any issue as they shoot at each other, but if you put 100 mg in a 500m radius, they will all target each other.

AKA instead of 100 machine guns targeted you have 100,000 entities targeted.

This is the same for aircraft gunners and pilots.

The 50km radius will be useful for SP, but they need to revise the AI code to make any real progress. Aiming entities are resource hogs.

But non aiming entities are worth nothing to the CPU. I've put over 500 trucks on the map in RoF with no issue.

The 'freeze' of AI entities might be a useful tool, especially if it can be improved to calculate flight routes and engagements instead of having to calculate all of the aiming and ballistics. I'm fairly sure that's what games like BMS do, and I've seen ARMA modes use similar 'dumb' ai tracking to manage insane amounts of units on servers.

Good post and on the money NS.

The graphics presets make sense at this point in development too. They can more easily see how the game runs without have a myriad of variables initially. So far with my settings on "Ultra" and FRL at 60, I'm pretty close 55-60fps with everything maxed and the 50k objects not on. Not bad for my midrange system.

[ATAG_EvangelusE]

With the new GFX pre-sets, I assume that it is best to leave all my Nvidea 3D settings to default (use application settings, etc)?

I added IL2.exe to my list of programmes in Nvidea CP so that BoS would not use the custom settings I set up for CloD.

Anyway, quick sightseeing sortie over Stalingrad using high settings - the words 'apocalyptic' and 'austere' came to mind. Interesting vista.....

[9./JG52_J-HAT]

As much as I don't like some censorship, I wish some of the negative spamming of COD, had been deleted. It might have given the developers a few more months breathing room, instead of fueling the politicking in the IC backrooms to change developers. I would have prefer BOS found it funding elsewhere.


+1

[Tvrdi]

Now the SSAO cant be turned off even via cfg ini (startup ini)....I dont have a problem with deleting posts (BTW I also got banned there now) but If they are deleting posts where ppl are saying facts or questions anything in development..then you know its their modus operandi - If you are not questioning - your welcome...if not..whell...yor whiped out. Thats whats the problem. They are even so perfid that the member of their team is posting here under false nickname lying as he was lying to ROF customers when he was giving this roadmap for 2012:


Finally, we know you want us to continue to improve the sim in other ways and we will continue to do that as best we can with the resources we have available. We will try to improve the flight-models of various aircraft and make improvements to the AI and other parts of the sim. Based on what we have been told by the community, we are working to prioritize what we can do for you and balance our schedule and resources to make some of them become a reality in 2012.

In the end, 777 doesnt own 1C and doesnt own rights for sturmovik name...theyr just partners...this is what I got on PM from one member of the 1C team.

BTW, what they did to Luthier with whom they took smiley pics in the past, is a disgrace which couldnt be easily forgotten or deleted (as they delete posts) in long term. For any true sim fan.

[FS~Fenice_1965]

One of my posts was deleted too with one made from Bliss. We were only saying that other sims have to catch Clod.

[fruitbat]

Jason was reading the thread when they disappeared.

Truth hurts, lol.

[ATAG_Bliss]

Jason was reading the thread when they disappeared.

Truth hurts, lol.

Clearly. But you can get a high five from Jason if you bad mouth other developers or other products. But saying one product has something better than the one he's trying to sell is a no no. It's no wonder there's about 3 times the people browsing these boards than the one's at IL2BOS.

[Mysticpuma]

I think the other point to remember is that Team Fusion will be adding aircraft, models, theatres...for free AND we are listening to those in our community and trying to help fix long-standing issues.

With Clod costing just $10 and lots more fixes, features and free content coming, BoS will have it's followers, but for those who want a community supported and affordable WW2 aviation simulation, CloD really will be the way to go. We are "Keeping the dream.alive". :)

Cheers, MP

[ATAG_Snapper]

I think the other point to remember is that Team Fusion will be adding aircraft, models, theatres...for free AND we are listening to those in our community and trying to help fix long-standing issues.

With Clod costing just $10 and lots more fixes, features and free content coming, BoS will have it's followers, but for those who want a community supported and affordable WW2 aviation simulation, CloD really will be the way to go. We are "Keeping the dream.alive". :)

Cheers, MP

You are truly Keeping the Dream Alive! :salute:

Also, we very rarely delete posts here on the ATAG forum unless they're really toxic. We may disagree, we may not like, but we don't delete. :D

[9./JG52_J-HAT]

Yeah MP, they are realizing CloD will be serious competition!

Funny thing is, they went the RoF engine way because CloD's was a dead end. Now more and more people are slowly coming back to CloD.

But I still think most will have both sims.

[Wulf]

I also have a deep seated mistrust of censorship, in fact, more than most I suspect. However, I find this discussion about the rights and wrongs of censorship on the BoS forum just a little disingenuous if not hypocritical.

Just how long do you imagine an overly negative 'rant' about Team Fusion, or some aspect of TF's work, would last on this Forum for example? Not long I'd say. Justified or not, I strongly suspect that any comments perceived as 'overly negative' (typically these days that's code for anything that isn't gushingly positive) would be shut down very quickly.

Personally, I'd prefer a situation where people get to say anything they like but I do understand how this could seriously undermine or even destroy a project before it got off the ground. This is particularly so in the case of TF where the outcome of the project is entirely dependent on the willingness of individuals to donate their time, essentially unsung and free of charge. Equally however, I can understand why a business enterprise (777/IC) that must turn a profit or go under, would also be highly sensitive to an uncensored discussion of one of its WIF. After all, failure will almost certainly have very serious consequences for the entire development team if not the future of the WW2 FS genre as a whole. As we all know, social media can be a very powerful tool, whether it's well directed and appropriately informed, or not. And lets be honest here, there are people out there who, for reasons of their own, would like to see the BoS project fall flat on its face.

[ATAG_Snapper]

Wulf, a thread will be closed if it starts to get nasty ie personal attacks. But the post(s) are not deleted as if they never existed. Perhaps you disagree, but I see a huge difference between closing a thread and unceremoniously deleting someone's post because you disagree with what's been said.

[LuseKofte]

I personally think that moderators are doing what the owners want.
Some put a little humanity in their job. Those who do, often find themselves explaining their action all the time.
I have been one for years and that is extreemly tierding. Snapper has to leave his person behind since what he say will always be related to Atag and bring politic into it. I do not agree on everything here. But be sure I would be banned many places for my posting. I promise there are no sensorship here

[ATAG_Bliss]

I also have a deep seated mistrust of censorship, in fact, more than most I suspect. However, I find this discussion about the rights and wrongs of censorship on the BoS forum just a little disingenuous if not hypocritical.

Just how long do you imagine an overly negative 'rant' about Team Fusion, or some aspect of TF's work, would last on this Forum for example? Not long I'd say. Justified or not, I strongly suspect that any comments perceived as 'overly negative' (typically these days that's code for anything that isn't gushingly positive) would be shut down very quickly.

Personally, I'd prefer a situation where people get to say anything they like but I do understand how this could seriously undermine or even destroy a project before it got off the ground. This is particularly so in the case of TF where the outcome of the project is entirely dependent on the willingness of individuals to donate their time, essentially unsung and free of charge. Equally however, I can understand why a business enterprise (777/IC) that must turn a profit or go under, would also be highly sensitive to an uncensored discussion of one of its WIF. After all, failure will almost certainly have very serious consequences for the entire development team if not the future of the WW2 FS genre as a whole. As we all know, social media can be a very powerful tool, whether it's well directed and appropriately informed, or not. And lets be honest here, there are people out there who, for reasons of their own, would like to see the BoS project fall flat on its face.

Wulf,

If a product is good, enough people will say it's good and it will be successful. I do not agree with sweeping concerns and criticisms of a product under the carpet, especially one you paid for, in any way, shape, or form. It doesn't matter how many forum minions say X about Y. When push comes to shove, the product itself determines it's popularity and success. ROF uses the same tactic, except the producer kept saying things like "if you keep supporting us, we'll get to fixing the FMs and other glaring issues" etc. Back then, the sim was fairly popular. Even had around 200 people online everyday. Now that constant babble from the producer did indeed bring in more money for the team, but the glaring issues that made ROF essentially dead now are still there.

So while I agree with you, that marketing has something to do with it, but the reality is, had ROF had a capable game engine, the game would be thriving today, instead of the small amount of people still playing it. So you can understand, especially for people like me, that already watched the way 777 does business, to hide all concerns and shove them under the carpet, is just another ROF in the making. You'll grab a whole bunch of people in the get go. They all have it in the back of their minds that the glaring issues and limitations of the game engine are going to get fixed, and then fast forward to 3 years later and they tell you to pound sand - aka - the sim dies.

There's a huge reason that you can't do MP yet, can't touch the editor, host your own missions etc, and it's all because of a marketing ploy to try to get as many people in as possible. Take any IL2 mission builder and try to build a similar mission with the same number of objects, let alone just doing some simple tasks that you can do with the FMB that the ROF ME is incapable of, and you soon will find people screaming about it, calling it junk. So it is smart on their part, but the reality is, in the end, regardless of all this post deletion, throwing everything under the carpet, etc.,etc., how good the sim is, how capable the sim is, and how realistic the sim is, is going to determine it's success.

And coming from ROF myself, it can't hold a candle to anything IL2COD can do. In the technical side of things, it can't hold a candle to 1946 either. Like I said, wait and see. But they have plenty of catching up to do. CGI promo videos may get people in the door, but as proved with ROF, you actually have to have a capable and immersive game, to keep them there.

[Wulf]

Wulf, a thread will be closed if it starts to get nasty ie personal attacks. But the post(s) are not deleted as if they never existed. Perhaps you disagree, but I see a huge difference between closing a thread and unceremoniously deleting someone's post because you disagree with what's been said.

Snapper, I think we would have to agree to disagree on this one. Whether you find a reason to shut something down or delete a post, censorship is censorship in my view. The method may differ from one forum to the next but the underlying purpose is usually the same.

[ATAG_Snapper]

Snapper, I think we would have to agree to disagree on this one. Whether you find a reason to shut something down or delete a post, censorship is censorship in my view. The method may differ from one forum to the next but the underlying purpose is usually the same.

Occasionally we'll reopen a closed thread once tempers have cooled. But even if we don't, the person/people who caused the thread to be closed still have their post(s) and their point of views there to be seen as they intended. If the post is deleted.....it's gone. In my view, to simply say censorship is censorship in either closing a thread or deleting posts is quite unfair.

[ATAG_Bliss]

Snapper, I think we would have to agree to disagree on this one. Whether you find a reason to shut something down or delete a post, censorship is censorship in my view. The method may differ from one forum to the next but the underlying purpose is usually the same.

No, the underlying purpose is hardly the same. This forum will never censor or delete posts, especially ones that deal in facts. If a thread is locked, it's because it's getting out of hand. That's not censorship at all. Find one thread here that was locked because of an opinion instead of someone being nasty and I'll eat my shorts or make Snapper eat his :D

[vranac]

Wolf, I understand your point and I must say the Russian side of forum is very lightly moderated if you compare it to the English one.
There is 25 pages about removing graphic settings there but developers don't care about that at all.
They have their goals, but a lot of customers is telling them that before the preorder they were telling one thing and now they are saying something else,
like if you don't like it , leave it. I can give you the link if you want. Han was saying that.

Look at this , even modded old il2 is better than this.

http://www.dodaj.rs/f/2a/Ln/4s02AQrv/post-231-0-07095000-1390.jpg
http://www.dodaj.rs/f/2L/vG/4eNZomdw/f36wrgp.jpg

Cart board boxes. 2D buildings. And people with entry level graphic cards (7770, 550 ...) have problems, 20 fps with that.

That engine have serious problems.

[ATAG_Snapper]

and I'll eat my shorts or make Snapper eat his :D


That's unfair! Bliss and Wulf are both unfair! :-P

[Wulf]

Wulf,

If a product is good, enough people will say it's good and it will be successful. I do not agree with sweeping concerns and criticisms of a product under the carpet, especially one you paid for, in any way, shape, or form. It doesn't matter how many forum minions say X about Y. When push comes to shove, the product itself determines it's popularity and success. ROF uses the same tactic, except the producer kept saying things like "if you keep supporting us, we'll get to fixing the FMs and other glaring issues" etc. Back then, the sim was fairly popular. Even had around 200 people online everyday. Now that constant babble from the producer did indeed bring in more money for the team, but the glaring issues that made ROF essentially dead now are still there.

So while I agree with you, that marketing has something to do with it, but the reality is, had ROF had a capable game engine, the game would be thriving today, instead of the small amount of people still playing it. So you can understand, especially for people like me, that already watched the way 777 does business, to hide all concerns and shove them under the carpet, is just another ROF in the making. You'll grab a whole bunch of people in the get go. They all have it in the back of their minds that the glaring issues and limitations of the game engine are going to get fixed, and then fast forward to 3 years later and they tell you to pound sand - aka - the sim dies.

There's a huge reason that you can't do MP yet, can't touch the editor, host your own missions etc, and it's all because of a marketing ploy to try to get as many people in as possible. Take any IL2 mission builder and try to build a similar mission with the same number of objects, let alone just doing some simple tasks that you can do with the FMB that the ROF ME is incapable of, and you soon will find people screaming about it, calling it junk. So it is smart on their part, but the reality is, in the end, regardless of all this post deletion, throwing everything under the carpet, etc.,etc., how good the sim is, how capable the sim is, and how realistic the sim is, is going to determine it's success.

And coming from ROF myself, it can't hold a candle to anything IL2COD can do. In the technical side of things, it can't hold a candle to 1946 either. Like I said, wait and see. But they have plenty of catching up to do. CGI promo videos may get people in the door, but as proved with ROF, you actually have to have a capable and immersive game, to keep them there.


I (pre) ordered/purchased ROF but never got to play it. Initially my 'puter wouldn't handle it (dual core and all that) and then, later, when I got a better one I couldn't get it to work for some reason. I contacted the ROF people about the problem and some Russian guy tried very patiently over 4 or 5 days to email me through the issues, but it was just beyond me and in the end I had to abandon it. I was sad about that but at no stage did I regret the purchase. As far as I was concerned I'd made a small contribution which had helped keep the spirit of WW 1 aviation alive and that, for me, was better than nothing.

I agree with you that, with BoS, the proof of the pudding will be in the eating, so to speak. Maybe it will be good and maybe not. Frankly, if I get to fly a reasonably well modeled 190 for a while it'll be well worth the price of the ticket. My concern is that by undermining the game before it is finished (before its even half finished actually) we run the risk of destroying its reputation unjustifiably, and in so doing, killing the thing before it even gets off the ground. As I've said before, if it turns out to be crap, I'll be one of the first in line to kick the thing to death. Until then, I'd like help rather than hinder its development.

[ATAG_JTDawg]

That's unfair! Bliss and Wulf are both unfair! :-P

Your wearing your winter shorts aren't you, ehh Snapper .Dem big red ones with the flap in the back :P

[LuseKofte]

I cannot see any problem beside a blown up megaproblem panic among customers.
So I think this is the last alpharelease we will ever see.
I really cannot do anything else than laugh about all this fuss.
I will await the release of the sturmovik, stuka, 111, pe2 then I will choose wether to be satisfyed or dissapointed. I have seen several good and satisfyed reports about stalingrad

[ATAG_Bliss]

Wolf, I understand your point and I must say the Russian side of forum is very lightly moderated if you compare it to the English one.
There is 25 pages about removing graphic settings there but developers don't care about that at all.
They have their goals, but a lot of customers is telling them that before the preorder they were telling one thing and now they are saying something else,
like if you don't like it , leave it. I can give you the link if you want. Han was saying that.

Look at this , even modded old il2 is better than this.

http://www.dodaj.rs/f/2a/Ln/4s02AQrv/post-231-0-07095000-1390.jpg
http://www.dodaj.rs/f/2L/vG/4eNZomdw/f36wrgp.jpg

Cart board boxes. 2D buildings. And people with entry level graphic cards (7770, 550 ...) have problems, 20 fps with that.

That engine have serious problems.

A bloody shame.

Just look at how the sequel was supposed to look like.. The detail between the Clod engine and BoS is just leagues apart sadly.

http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g260/restranger/BoM/Kremlin.jpg

[ATAG_Snapper]

Your wearing your winter shorts aren't you, ehh Snapper .Dem big red ones with the flap in the back :P

That's a visual that no one wants! LOL

:)

[Wulf]

No, the underlying purpose is hardly the same. This forum will never censor or delete posts, especially ones that deal in facts. If a thread is locked, it's because it's getting out of hand. That's not censorship at all. Find one thread here that was locked because of an opinion instead of someone being nasty and I'll eat my shorts or make Snapper eat his :D

Hey, happy to do the research BUT; only if you and Snapper eat 'each others' shorts. Hehehehehehe .. that's fair..... :devilish:

[LuseKofte]

I disagree I think this looks good. I am looking forward to this

[LuseKofte]

Early access - week #8

This time we bring you some obvious and not so obvious changes. The first significant one is the main Stalingrad map. It's really large and has lots of objects. That's why we need to evaluate your PCs' performance at this map to prepare smart decisions for further optimization.

Also we plan to use this simple way of optimization: remove all unnecessary objects that are out of 50km radius from the mission zone. That should help to reduce system load. So we offer you both options in this session: 1 - has this optimization mechanism with faraway objects removed, and 2 - all objects just remain on their places. Let's see how your PCs can handle the uncut version.
In future, when you get to make your own missions you'll be free to choose whether to keep or remove those objects. Our own mission will always follow that optimization scheme because players' computers have very different capabilities. Till Quick mission editor is added we won't write any new scenarios, stability is much more important. So we simply moved our previously created missions to the main map.

The second big addition to the early access version is graphical settings presets. This is a very controversial decision, and I expect some intense discussions on the forum, but I also hope to get some support as well. This decision has it's background.
Firstly, unfortunately a lot of our players consider themselves as IT experts but actually they have no clue. Having read other "experts" posts on the web, they manually change game settings and modify driver preferences. As a result they lose performance, get graphical glitches of all kinds, etc. After that they pour out their complaints on the forums and fill up our customer support mailbox, and demand on immediate fixes. Look, we develop technologies that take everything into account including video card software which allows us to reach balance between performance and quality.

Thus, starting today we remove custom video setting from the menu leaving you 4 preset option, so you just pick one that you like most. We also add Ultra preset since the recent feedback says that your PCs run the game pretty smoothly. In Ultra graphic quality has been increased - try it out and tell us how you like it.

If you have some problems read this Can't update - read this! (http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/2980-cant-update-read/) and this Game setup and settings FAQ (http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/2095-game-setup-and-settings-faq/)

Access will be open since 20:00 GMT January 17th till 20:00 GMT January 20th.

I take the negative feedback for just being negative
All these remarks done knowing why and still neglect to understand.
In some ways I find BOS better than clod. If this are to be a new favorite remains to see when it is finnished
You guys really do not give this a chance in hell do you ;)

[Broodwich]

Lol if it worked on the original settings, why would people have to screw with them? Vast majority of people in my experience has been if they don't know IT, they hate messing with it. Ya dig?

And anyone who thinks having something deleted vs locked should have their posts deleted :getaway:

And ps, didn't this SIM receive hugely negative reviews and now since people have been fixing it it has been growing?? Basically I agree with bliss

[dburne]

I think the other point to remember is that Team Fusion will be adding aircraft, models, theatres...for free AND we are listening to those in our community and trying to help fix long-standing issues.

With Clod costing just $10 and lots more fixes, features and free content coming, BoS will have it's followers, but for those who want a community supported and affordable WW2 aviation simulation, CloD really will be the way to go. We are "Keeping the dream.alive". :)

Cheers, MP

That is for sure!
I am participating in the BOS early access, and undoubtedly will be flying the sim in addition to Cliffs of Dover , however Cliffs will remain my go to WWII sim for quite some time, thanks to the efforts of TF. I do not see BOS approaching near the depth and level of play one gets with TF modded Cliffs of Dover. It is stunning and so much one can do with it. I am so excited about the future for Cliffs thanks to TF, and hope they continue to sacrifice their time as they have, just for us fans of WWII flight simming. We are very fortunate to have a group of guys with the love they have for this sim, to expand upon it and provide us with the level of play we so enjoy with the sim.

I am not saying BOS is bad by any means, just a very different sim experience for me. I certainly have room on my rig for both, and will find ways to enjoy both, just wish I had more play time to devote to both. Being a single player, once 4.01 is out lookout though, I will be doing some major offline campaign flying with it. Now if only TF could do something about those dang weapon loadouts for SP... :)

As far as the forums, being as how I frequent both of them on a regular basis, I certainly see what others talk about, and frown when I see some of it going on. Unfortunately though, these forums are not protected with rights of free speech, no matter how much we may wish they were. When in them we are in someone else's house, and whether we like it or not, at the mercy of what they view as acceptable in their house. There is a certain culture that exists in each, and does not take very long to realize the type of culture each one generates.

I will say this forum, is without a doubt the best I have seen in terms of latitude allowed in voicing one's opinions, amongst all the flight sim related forums that I view and participate in.

The ATAG guys, along with the members of TF, are about the classiest I have seen, and we are so fortunate to have them provide what they do for us.

[gavagai]

A bloody shame.

Just look at how the sequel was supposed to look like.. The detail between the Clod engine and BoS is just leagues apart sadly.

Why is that an engine difference and not a difference in 3d modeling detail? However, I agree that Stalingrad (city) looks a bit underwhelming for a 2014 sim.

As for censorship, I'm surprised that some are acting surprised. How's that LagG-3 roll rate coming along?

[FS~Fenice_1965]

It is true that everyone will have the possibility to fly more than one sim. This is good mainly for Single Player Btw.
One of the things that was fantastic and amazing of the IL2 era was the fact that all simmers were mostly gathered under one roof, and that was the roof of the best simulation available.
That situation gave an unbelievable impulse to the genre, not only in terms of servers attendance, but also in terms of development of the sim and lasting of the fun situation. Everyone was partecipating in the same world and contributing to its development, exploring all its possibilities.
The creation of a large community with the same interest is a fundamental part of the creation of an amazing fun area.

Maybe I am bit nostalgic, but - even if TF made an amazing work - I cannot stop thinking what could have been done if all the resources that now are wasted in an inferior simulation would have been used in CLOD.

[Foul Ole Ron]

How's that LagG-3 roll rate coming along?

Both the 109 and Lagg-3 roll too fast in BOS. It's hard to find data on the Lagg to be honest but in the 400-600kph range the 109 F-4 should be doing a full aileron roll without rudder use in 4-4.5 seconds. In BOS it's 3 seconds which is a pretty big difference.

[gavagai]

Interesting. At 500km/h the Fw 190 roll rate was about 125 degrees/second.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/naca868-rollchart.jpg

[Chivas]

The ROF/BOS game engine should improve at a faster rate with the WW2 theaters than the WW1 theater. The ROF fan base was limited, as was the aerial WW1 theater of war. The larger fan base, and years of possible content should give a quality development team the incentive, time, money, and competition to improve their game engine. Just as COD will overcome IC's decision to release an unfinished product. In the end both COD, and BOS game engines will provide the community with countless hours of entertainment. That said as much as I support all cfs's, and fully supported BOS with hard cash, I wouldn't shed too many tears if BOS crashed and burned, as there is still a very bad taste in my mouth for the backroom politicking that killed COD's funding.

[Tycoon]

To be honest the rendering of the planes on the outside IN game is much better in BOS than COD in my opinion, DCS is really good in this department as well. COD planes look great in screenshots but in game it is a lot worse(1946 was the same way), although in game or not the cockpits are great.

[Mysticpuma]

Yeah, this doesn't look anyway near as good as BoS ;(


https://vimeo.com/84512255

https://vimeo.com/84512255

[Skoshi_Tiger]

Looks pretty darn good to me! Keep up the good work Mystic, those videos are really good!

[LuseKofte]

Looking good Puma

[Tycoon]

Nice video, and don't get me wrong I love COD, but I still think the BOS exteriors are superior.

[Kwiatek]

Nice video, and don't get me wrong I love COD, but I still think the BOS exteriors are superior.

Yea i think the same 2 things which BOS is better then CLOD are external models of planes and ground behaviour.

[Old_Canuck]

Yea i think the same 2 things which BOS is better then CLOD are external models of planes and ground behaviour.

I sincerely hope those two features are enough to make it work for them. Overall atmosphere and gameplay will be the deciding factors, though, IMHO.

[Mattias]

Yea i think the same 2 things which BOS is better then CLOD are external models of planes and ground behaviour.

Yes the external models in Clod are just the worst :salute:
http://i1054.photobucket.com/albums/s497/MusseMus77/shot_20140123_120439_zpscf9fc514.png (http://s1054.photobucket.com/user/MusseMus77/media/shot_20140123_120439_zpscf9fc514.png.html)

http://i1054.photobucket.com/albums/s497/MusseMus77/shot_20140123_120654_zpsf770fee4.png (http://s1054.photobucket.com/user/MusseMus77/media/shot_20140123_120654_zpsf770fee4.png.html)

http://i1054.photobucket.com/albums/s497/MusseMus77/shot_20140113_153955_zpsf06ef3c7.png (http://s1054.photobucket.com/user/MusseMus77/media/shot_20140113_153955_zpsf06ef3c7.png.html)

Cheers/m

[Tycoon]

Yes the external models in Clod are just the worst :salute:
http://i1054.photobucket.com/albums/s497/MusseMus77/shot_20140123_120439_zpscf9fc514.png (http://s1054.photobucket.com/user/MusseMus77/media/shot_20140123_120439_zpscf9fc514.png.html)

http://i1054.photobucket.com/albums/s497/MusseMus77/shot_20140123_120654_zpsf770fee4.png (http://s1054.photobucket.com/user/MusseMus77/media/shot_20140123_120654_zpsf770fee4.png.html)

http://i1054.photobucket.com/albums/s497/MusseMus77/shot_20140113_153955_zpsf06ef3c7.png (http://s1054.photobucket.com/user/MusseMus77/media/shot_20140113_153955_zpsf06ef3c7.png.html)

Cheers/m

Uh, no one is saying they're the worst, they are very good.

[Injerin]

7093

[LuseKofte]

Good point Injerin,

I struggle with this also. Giving praise to BOS does not mean critique to CLOD.

Everything turns politics in here and I really do not know why this section is here when it is so unbearable

[Mattias]

Uh, no one is saying they're the worst, they are very good.

:salute:

Yes, I was only teasing fellow TF member Kwiatek :D
In my opinion the planes look great in both Clod and BoS :thumbsup:


7093

Yep :thumbsup: Although I personally prefer Coke I have nothing against having a Pepsi from time to time :)

Cheers/m

[Mastiff]

ok, ok, ok, I think Pepsi should be CLOD and BOS should be Coke!!! Damn it Injerin get it right!

[Injerin]

ok, ok, ok, I think Pepsi should be CLOD and BOS should be Coke!!! Damn it Injerin get it right!

LOL! Thats the whole point :) Its what you prefer :)

[Hood]

Back on topic. The problem isn't the opinion it's how that opinion is given. And sometimes it's the people.

Take this thread for example. Nobody is bashing CLOD but some have taken the opportunity to bash BOS. I don't know why.

And there's a wish that the toxic nature of the banana forum was chopped out yet a person who is only ever negative about BOS complains a post was deleted. Double standards here.

Proactive moderation is a good tool to keep emotions in check and to avoid pointless discussions like this one.

Wait and see us all you can do.

Hood

[ChiefRedCloud]

I sometimes get tired of all the splinters I get from sitting on this fence :recon: but I will say it again .... to EACH their OWN ..... translated .... Play what you like and have your opinions ..... because I have mine .... :)

[ATAG_Bliss]

Back on topic. The problem isn't the opinion it's how that opinion is given. And sometimes it's the people.

Take this thread for example. Nobody is bashing CLOD but some have taken the opportunity to bash BOS. I don't know why.

And there's a wish that the toxic nature of the banana forum was chopped out yet a person who is only ever negative about BOS complains a post was deleted. Double standards here.

Proactive moderation is a good tool to keep emotions in check and to avoid pointless discussions like this one.

Wait and see us all you can do.

Hood

Hood,

You take criticisms as a bash. I take them as much needed corrections. A bash is saying "this is garbage". A bash is not "the lagg rolls to fast, the textures have low resolution etc" Essentially bashing something is insulting something. There's a huge difference between the 2. The problem is, just as what is stated in this very thread, people's LEGITIMATE criticisms are deleted and removed.

Just like your starter here "A person who is only ever negative about BOS" - that says it all. You say that but you can easily look at plenty of the OP's posts saying much of the opposite and giving the devs plenty of praise about BoS. So why say such an false comment? If you want to be taken seriously you need to cut all the BS aside and actually read what really written in this thread. And the point is "legitimate concerns are being swept under the carpet" because it makes the devs look bad. Regardless of what you say, that's exactly what is happening. And regardless of the monumental Clod bashing on the BoS site, those comments stay up.

So the OP, I have to agree with, I've had plenty of my concerns (well thought out mind you, with examples to boot) deleted on that forum also.

So I don't agree with anything you just said. It's simply too far from reality.

[Hood]

That's a post with its own brand of BS..

Legitimate concerns? What are they? That a game at alpha stage may or may not have certain attributes when it is finally released? Here's the thing - alpha means it's nowhere near finished.

And why raise legitimate concerns that have been stated ad nauseum since the announcement about the game? Object limits were discussed from the very first week.

I would object to discriminatory censorship but if they want to keep positive energy it's up to them how they moderate. And if there is repetition then get rid of it.

And you're into double standards again. We all know CLOD was a pile of crap when it was released but continued bashing of it on any site is pointless. But you complain about it being on the BOS forums yet allow BOS bashing on this forum. Hmmm.

I really wish the banana forums had been moderated in a similar manner to the BOS forums. But that would have required developer interaction which didn't happen - a real real shame.

Look at the OP's posts on this forum and get the tenor of his comments.

Over and out.

Hood

[ATAG_Bliss]

That's a post with its own brand of BS..

I'll break it down Barney style just for you as someone that came from ROF and knows how these guys deal with legitimate concerns.


Legitimate concerns? What are they? That a game at alpha stage may or may not have certain attributes when it is finally released? Here's the thing - alpha means it's nowhere near finished.

Flight model - the most important aspect of the game. If you simply take a peak at the ROF forum. This game is not an alpha btw and is a finished product (Just so we get that out of the way) you'll notice signature after signature, (aka their forum signature) asking for flight model corrections. This has been going on for years on end. There have been threads started asking for anything from letting the community fix them to kickstarters, to customers paying for the fixes etc. This is ongoing for a FINISHED game. And where's the devs fixing the flight models at? Oh that's right, they said "it costs us too much money" so they aren't doing it anytime in the soon in the future.

Maybe the flight model isn't a concern of yours, but I can assure you it's a concern of many. So when that same team essentially left many broken flight models YEARS AFTER a FINISHED game, you think just because this new venture is slated Alpha on the box that they won't do the same thing again? Where's the logic in that?


And why raise legitimate concerns that have been stated ad nauseum since the announcement about the game? Object limits were discussed from the very first week.

Because, just like with any significant change EVER in the history of mankind, the only way it EVER happened was by the voice of people. This is the same thing with video games. You think if EVERYONE said "Awesome Game" etc, the devs are even going to worry about spending one cent on fixing an issue? Are you really serious? If enough people bitch and complain either the devs fix the problem, or people get pissed off with them and leave the game. The latter is what happened with ROF. It used to have 200 people online everyday. This was back when the game crashed constantly and there were far less planes (content) than there is now. But without the core issues being resolved, and the constant drip line being fed to customers about support etc., people finally get tired of it.


I would object to discriminatory censorship but if they want to keep positive energy it's up to them how they moderate. And if there is repetition then get rid of it.

Positive energy may get you a few extra sales on the front end, but the game itself gets you people that keep playing it. Regardless of how many people say "Yay, I love it" or not, the game itself will determine it's success.


And you're into double standards again. We all know CLOD was a pile of crap when it was released but continued bashing of it on any site is pointless. But you complain about it being on the BOS forums yet allow BOS bashing on this forum. Hmmm.

No, that's your opinion. I thought Clod was fantastic on release. I thought so because of the core of the game was like no other. Yes, it was FPS hungry, performed poorly, had bugs gallore etc., but no other sim had the core of the game like Cliffs did. And no other sim has the ability of Cliffs even 3 years later. I don't see that changing. You call it a pile of crap and bash it, but the entire reason the sim is being modded is because of what it CAN do, and that is far more in ability than the likes of BoS/ROF etc.


I really wish the banana forums had been moderated in a similar manner to the BOS forums. But that would have required developer interaction which didn't happen - a real real shame.

The developers aren't the one's moderating the BoS forum. The producer aka the salesman/promoter of the game is moderating it. That would be like Ubisoft or 1C's business manager moderating a forum. As proven with this forum, and it's popularity, light moderation and all criticisms and concerns freely open have proved a MUCH better atmosphere than any censorship could possibly have.


Look at the OP's posts on this forum and get the tenor of his comments.

I did. He's pissed his post was deleted. I was all the times mine were too. And like many people have already done that have had the same treatment, they simply stop going over there in the 1st place. His tenor is acting like any normal person would when the moderators act like they are 5 years old.

[SoW Reddog]

And if there is repetition then get rid of it.

Funny, every post of yours is the same too. Besides, without repetition how are they supposed to know that more than the first guy to post thinks something's wrong? Problem is they don't care. They have all your money's already and a track record of delivering up to the point they feel it's cost effective. Good luck with that.

[Tvrdi]

@Hood ( or whoever you are behind that nick)....I never whined or complained i rl and so on sim forums. Not that kinda guy. I was just pointing out what should be fixed or implemented. That is because i care for sims. And for that head of 777 made sure i got perm bans on ROF, now BOS and even SimHQ forum where I just criticized how they treated some reactions from community members and beta testers ( I used to be RoFs core beta tester!). They think if they ban ppl who "complain" they will get rid of "bad words" and get better sells. But ppl are not stupid. I will give you just one example. When i was beta tester i helped with fixing n17 roll rate. Then, mig77, me and few others at the RoF beta forum reported that Pup has too good climb rate..way of... They ignored us and I asked why no response on beta forum. Jay and I both got expelled from beta team for complainig about fm. Later i got perm ban across all forums where Jason has direct or indirect influence. This is how they deal with criticism. many ppl invested in buying new planes and mods in ROF in trust they wll fix FM innacuracies (they even announced a list). But nothing happened. ROFs ans BoSs project leader said that he has a dream about ROF. And where is ROF now? There are some good ppl in 777 like Han, or Zak....777 doesnt own 1c but one would think so when you see Jasons post. They are full of arrogancy which is unaceptable nommatter whomtheyr directed. He pictured himself with Luthier and latter stabbed him in the back...
regarding BoS...i dont hate a freakin sim lol....I will be playin that too...camon

[Tycoon]

I sure hope the fms get fixed in ROF, it's one of the best games I have. I guess the same goes for BOS but in all seriousness I don't know too much about fms and just go off of what other people say(you are telling the truth, right?):). But for me at least BOS fm aren't off enough to make it a game breaker for me and I'm sure it's going to become a great sim like ROF.

[Tvrdi]

I sure hope the fms get fixed in ROF, it's one of the best games I have. I guess the same goes for BOS but in all seriousness I don't know too much about fms and just go off of what other people say(you are telling the truth, right?):). But for me at least BOS fm aren't off enough to make it a game breaker for me and I'm sure it's going to become a great sim like ROF.

I like how they modelled ground handling and stalls and spins. However I do hope LaGG wouldnt have such a good roll rate as it never had in rl..its not FW...I do hope BOS will be a great and popularmsim because it would be a mix of CLOD, warthunder and ld il2. However, if you want to experience the most realistic experience, for this you would need to run CLOD, because as history tought us, the FM and CEM isnt a priority for 777. Theyv been constantly reminding us how they listen the community....that is true but only for minor things in the sim...main stuff as cem, fm, graphic settings, smaa as option isnt there to be changed even though ppl are having polls where 95% of them are asking to have them changed..over at BOs forum....wheres the listetning there? for main stuff...I dont know why ppl take as granted whatever comes from their mouth...its business...

[gavagai]

many ppl invested in buying new planes and mods in ROF in trust they wll fix FM innacuracies (they even announced a list). But nothing happened.

I even upgraded my computer back in 2012 in anticipation of the FM reviews because I figured I would be playing a lot of Rise of Flight.

What was the list? After the SE5a and Nieuport 11/17 they said there would be more, and it never happened. Since then I've always wondered what they had planned.

[Headshot]

Sorry but once again I see the same people being negative. Bliss it's very ,very intimidating saying something contrary to you as you treat opposing views as a challenge and you let forward tirades of facts and opinion to shut them down. To add to it you seem to have a large fan base that will back you up right or wrong.

Do you really think that people that are genuinely prepared to give BOS a go can't see the faults for them self's. If you hang with mates that are always negative about something you are interested in you will ether stop discussing that subject or you find a new group of friends (is that really what ATAG want) that are more willing to be supportive to your needs to discuses your interests .

I know I am going to cop it for voicing this but as I've said before if you really don't like BOS that's ok, leave it for those that do. Stop ruining it for those of us that wish to discuses and share news of BOS. I for one will give you the same courtesy.

[Kwiatek]

Unfortunately Tvrdi and Gavagai said a lot of true regarding ROF and 777 proceeding. Im afraid that situation could be repeated with BOS actually.

Well i bought standart version of BOS having little hope for these sim. If it would not meet my requirements in a final game i just not buy any more their products. It is simple. There will be still expanded CLOD TF mod to play and incoming WW2 DCS.

[gavagai]

Sorry but once again I see the same people being negative. Bliss it's very ,very intimidating saying something contrary to you as you treat opposing views as a challenge and you let forward tirades of facts and opinion to shut them down. To add to it you seem to have a large fan base that will back you up right or wrong.


I have no special affiliation here, but what seems to rub bliss the wrong way is when people point stuff out and then others get all emotional about it. Here are some things that are true but will earn name-calling or complaints about unfairly "bashing":

777 said they were going to review some FMs in 2012, and then didn't. FMs can never be perfect, but they shouldn't be obviously wrong. RoF has a few that are obviously wrong, and they have a very negative impact on the quality of multiplayer combat.

Jason said we wouldn't have to worry about the channel map splitting the community, and then it did.

The LagG-3 rolls as well as a Fw 190A, the latter being the best rolling fighter of WW2.

Pointing these things out is not disloyal, or bad, or whining, or whatever. It's just fair warning for those who have high hopes for BoS. Many of the community members at BoS seem very happy to state that BoS is a "middle-path" toward realism. If that's what they like then I have no argument with them, but I take this community to be one with higher standards.

[Headshot]

I've been told the lag roll rate is wrong, OK no worries. The some one said the roll rates wrong, mmm I think I heard that. Hey look what TF has done and by the way the lag roll rate is wrong. Gun to the head.
PS I didn't like ROF but thats ok. BOS is not ROF it only based on it like TF is not the original COD that came out 2 years ago.

[ATAG_Colander]

I've been told the lag roll rate is wrong, OK no worries. The some one said the roll rates wrong, mmm I think I heard that. Hey look what TF has done and by the way the lag roll rate is wrong. Gun to the head.
PS I didn't like ROF but thats ok. BOS is not ROF it only based on it like TF is not the original COD that came out 2 years ago.

I agree but the Lag roll rate is wrong.



Sorry, couldn't resist :)

[Headshot]

Ok lol :)

[ATAG_Bliss]

I have no special affiliation here, but what seems to rub bliss the wrong way is when people point stuff out and then others get all emotional about it. Here are some things that are true but will earn name-calling or complaints about unfairly "bashing":

777 said they were going to review some FMs in 2012, and then didn't. FMs can never be perfect, but they shouldn't be obviously wrong. RoF has a few that are obviously wrong, and they have a very negative impact on the quality of multiplayer combat.

Jason said we wouldn't have to worry about the channel map splitting the community, and then it did.

The LagG-3 rolls as well as a Fw 190A, the latter being the best rolling fighter of WW2.

Pointing these things out is not disloyal, or bad, or whining, or whatever. It's just fair warning for those who have high hopes for BoS. Many of the community members at BoS seem very happy to state that BoS is a "middle-path" toward realism. If that's what they like then I have no argument with them, but I take this community to be one with higher standards.

Pretty close. The reason anyone points out errors is because they want them fixed. Anyone can search my name under the 1C forum and find all the threads I've started about bugs and problems with Clod etc. But man, if you try and do the same with ROF/BOS, some people are so down right angry and pathetic, the last one I saw was me being compared to being the leader of the Westboro Baptist Church.

I guess the real issue I have is it seems a select few individuals only real motives on forums are to try and drag people down. People like Luke_FF, NattyIced, Hooves, etc., are all people who will call you every name under the sun when you point out serious flaws within BoS/ROF. These are the people that are a toxic to the flight sim community. The yes men will never be able to provide you with a better product because anything that is a flaw or pointed out by such, these individuals come in and completely attack the individual stating it. Next thing you know, the actual meaning/topic of the conversation is lost.

So yes, you could say that I argue with facts. It's surprisingly the thing that pisses most of these yes men off the most. Their only rebuttal from there is to not actually talk about the discussion, but instead try to attack the individual. I see it here also.

And you can say ROF is not BOS, but it is. It's the same game engine. It's the same editor. The biggest changes between the 2 are they are using much better external resolutions of the planes, to be more precise, they are using the EXACT ones from Clod. But from what I've seen, all the bits that made me not like ROF (the inability of it etc) are all going to be there in BoS also. So perhaps I should stop talking about it. But, just like my hopes when I was a core beta tester for ROF, unless you try to make it better and ask for something to be better, it will likely never change. Sadly, in ROFs case, when you tried to do this, you were removed from the team.

[gavagai]

Whatever happened to mig-77 btw? Sent to the gulag for insubordination?

[LuseKofte]

Likeit or not, intentional or not, this section is a pro clod section and not a section intended for BOS. I wish it could disappear, whatever reason it exist it does only divide and does not bring communities closer.

[Tycoon]

I really have to say that although these critics of BOS have raised very valid points about it(points that I appreciate:D), they seem to be almost camping out against BOS, like they want an argument.
Tvirdi you're the OP of a thread in this BOS section called BOS, a sim? and If you were not trying to start a firefight with that post then....well, I don't know what you were doing, perhaps what you were trying to do with this topic? Look the point is like Bliss said we really have to have these discussions, but around here they almost always start like we jumped into the middle of a fight.

[Headshot]

Bliss did you say you were a tester for ROF and after a disagreement you were removed from their team ? If so any negativity from you could be seen as sower grapes. Sorry but true , I can now see were the resentment is coming from.

[ATAG_Bliss]

No. There's no sour grapes. Believe it or not when you beta test a game your entire point of doing so is to tell the developers what's wrong with it. You don't test to kiss their ass. You test to criticize faults. So I'm not upset with them for being removed as a beta tester. I'm dissapoonent with how they do business. Their beta testers now are mainly comprised of "yes men" and fanatics that think everything is perfect. Essentially, comprised of the exact opposite of what a AAA title, let alone a competitive game's development team wants. Most of the top testers with the most knowledge (real pilots and engineers) have long all resigned or were removed. People simply give up out of frustration and lose hope. Essentially why the game, though running really nice and looking decent, is all but dead compared to where it used to be. Again, when the core issues remain, no amount of content will keep those around that are tired of it.

I don't know how many beta tests you've been part of, but I've done quite a bit for AAA titles. Case in point, for CSGO the Devs actually paid a bunch of money to one of the top comp teams in CSS to get a no shit assessment on what needed work. They were out there for a week. I, an old money player (CEVO Pro / CAL -I TWL-I/ ESEA, EGN etc - comp money leagues I played in) was invited to beta test the game. This was long before the beta footage people saw on youtube. The point is, the Devs of these titles want to know what's wrong with it. Ilya / Oleg for instance, wanted to hear as much criticism as possible. This 777 team takes it the other way and soon labels you as someone with an agenda. Yeah, an agenda to make the game better. Sadly they are about the only dev team that see it that way. Get involved with some popular beta testing of games if you can, and you'll see what good beta testers do, the last of which is be biased.

[Injerin]

After reading about 100+ of these types of threads I will comment on what I see. SO HERE IT GOES:

A flight sim in development ( which there are alot including CLOD and BOS) You as a person cannot really assess it, things will change maybe for the better or the worse who the hell knows its the developer, programmers who make that final decision, us as players who actually play the game can only speculate the real real outcome. I suggest this whole dick waving contest come to a hault for humanity's sake. You are not pressured in any way to buy such games, if its to your liking then by all means play it, if it sucks to your standards then don't, its as simple as that. To compare these titles is just plain flat out ignorant. There should be no argument nor debate what so ever.............

[Tvrdi]

After reading about 100+ of these types of threads I will comment on what I see. SO HERE IT GOES:

A flight sim in development ( which there are alot including CLOD and BOS) You as a person cannot really assess it, things will change maybe for the better or the worse who the hell knows its the developer, programmers who make that final decision, us as players who actually play the game can only speculate the real real outcome. I suggest this whole dick waving contest come to a hault for humanity's sake. You are not pressured in any way to buy such games, if its to your liking then by all means play it, if it sucks to your standards then don't, its as simple as that. To compare these titles is just plain flat out ignorant. There should be no argument nor debate what so ever.............

Last thing I want to exprience is bitterness because of some arrogant ignorants, bean counters and their a**e lickers ...So I will just move on...Good thing ahed of CLOD and I hope BOS will be great too but this time I definitely wont expect much. Much less I would like to post anything on 777s boards because there ppl are being removed for political reasons less for breaking any usual forum rules (insults, etc).

Lets move on

[gavagai]

Yes, chill31 removed himself from the core testing group because of the FM recalcitrance. Among the open-beta testers there was a WW1 air power historian, and he left for similar reasons. People with professional backgrounds in aeronautical engineering or WW1 aviation history were basically told that their opinions were not needed.

[Tycoon]

Yes, chill31 removed himself from the core testing group because of the FM recalcitrance. Among the open-beta testers there was a WW1 air power historian, and he left for similar reasons. People with professional backgrounds in aeronautical engineering or WW1 aviation history were basically told that their opinions were not needed.

I didn't know chill31 was a tester, why is he still posting data on the ROF forum?

[gavagai]

He is flight testing his new Fokker Dr.1.

[vranac]

:faint:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1A0qumyf3bk#t=0

[Mastiff]

:faint:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1A0qumyf3bk#t=0

lol Hey V that's called a work in progress...all setting are still automatic. and the games release date is still 2 months out..

[vranac]

Mastiff, you're not reading the Russian side of the forums.

Han said FM is finished for the aeroplanes you have now, they should fly like that.
I hope they'll adjust that but I think they won't.

They just don't care about that.

They'll just make nice big explosions for you to enjoy when you push the trigger.

[Mastiff]

Mastiff, you're not reading the Russian side of the forums.

Han said FM is finished for the aeroplanes you have now, they should fly like that.
I hope they'll adjust that but I think they won't.

They just don't care about that.

They'll just make nice big explosions for you to enjoy when you push the trigger.

well I don't know what the Russians are smoking, but on my "word" and from being under a NDA, not official but, they are not done with coding the trim, which will in turn need to tweak the FM..

trust me there 2 months out, only hammering out small details right now..

[SoW Reddog]

So it's still WIP, alpha, 37% complete, but they're going to get it all done in 2 months and are only working on the small stuff? m'kay. So glad I didn't buy it then.

[vranac]

Yes, only hammering FM for other 6 aeroplanes because il-2 and Ju-87 are finished.

Look, I expected FM to be good.

And when you are talking about smoking I quoted devs.

[Hood]

So it's still WIP, alpha, 37% complete, but they're going to get it all done in 2 months and are only working on the small stuff? m'kay. So glad I didn't buy it then.

Me too.

But I'm having a blast with it. I'm at the point where it reflects value for money with plenty more enjoyment to come.

I like the myths though.

2 months - they've said Q2 2014 and of course like many games that might slip.

37% finished - no idea how that is worked out. Maybe it reflects 37% of content has been added to the final build, but lots of other things are already nearly done to be added. Multiplayer is in beta testing so add that and maybe it'll go to 70%. Or it'll go to 38% because effects are calculated at 40% of the build - all guesswork.

FMs 90% done. Wonder what the other 10% is. Maybe it's like a recipe and the extra 10% is what gives the taste the wow factor and removes the oddities.

Ho hum we'll all have to wait and see.

Hood

[Tvrdi]

Ho hum we'll all have to wait and see.
Hood

Ofcourse. I dont regret buying BOS. But if the FM will be close to its current state then it cant be called IL2 46 successor. They probably went for "I like that explosion" crowd, which is I guess, more ppl than us the damn FM "geeks". I dont expect any sim to reproduce the real thing (and how it could be?) but if it isnt any better than CLOD or even IL2 46 with latest HSFX mods then.....Im out. After all I can gift my acc to anybody I want and the money isnt trashed (and the money is the last which will be missed).

[Hood]

Ofcourse. I dont regret buying BOS. But if the FM will be close to its current state then it cant be called IL2 46 successor. They probably went for "I like that explosion" crowd, which is I guess, more ppl than us the damn FM "geeks". I dont expect any sim to reproduce the real thing (and how it could be?) but if it isnt any better than CLOD or even IL2 46 with latest HSFX mods then.....Im out. After all I can gift my acc to anybody I want and the money isnt trashed (and the money is the last which will be missed).

I agree with the sentiment regarding FMs. There is a "but" though.

But what is "better"? To me IL2 and CLOD have aircraft that fly on rails - they seem easier to control than I would expect. The aircraft in BOS feel harder to control. Is that more accurate or better I don't know if it is more real. I know the control method is modelled differently (no allowance for short joysticks) but that doesn't seem to be all of the change. I also know of the problems but again they may be corrected before release.

Ultimately if it's rubbish then it's rubbish. If it's ok then it's ok, but will we be happy with that? If it's fantastic then some will still gripe. IL2 spoiled us for so long our expectations are now sky high - maybe that's our problem.

Hood

[Mattias]

IL2 spoiled us for so long our expectations are now sky high - maybe that's our problem.


This! :thumbsup:

If BoS did not have the il-2 prefix it would not suffer nearly as much critique on these boards.
As it is now, comparing BoS to its "precursors" is inevitable. :recon:

Cheers/m

[1lokos]

So it's still WIP, alpha, 37% complete, but they're going to get it all done in 2 months and are only working on the small stuff? m'kay. So glad I didn't buy it then.

The question is what is "37%".

DM is 60% done - Loft in December DD.
LaGG FM is finished - ZAK in Russian Forum a mount ago.

I think that for DM unless perhapes more fire, smoke and "confetti" (people like "Hollywood" effects) what we see now is what we get on release.
In Mr.X video the LaGG wing hit 109 tail that fall, and after the 109 aileron fall too... :stunned:
If the plane is shaken, the pieces fall? I have see landing gear fall after wing tip has been hit by MG fire...

In topic (now locked) about rudder sensitivity (109 do roll with rudder) ZAK say
"As I said (I think I did) Petrovich plans to work on that, and it may slightly change. But please do not expect any dramatical changes - our controls will remain different from what you may be used to."

This indulge me think that FM will not be different from what is seen.

The "experts" advice is get a long throw joystick with Force Feedback and forgot "old arcade" sims FM. :joystick:

Sokol1

[Tvrdi]

I agree with the sentiment regarding FMs. There is a "but" though.

But what is "better"? To me IL2 and CLOD have aircraft that fly on rails - they seem easier to control than I would expect. The aircraft in BOS feel harder to control. Is that more accurate or better I don't know if it is more real. I know the control method is modelled differently (no allowance for short joysticks) but that doesn't seem to be all of the change. I also know of the problems but again they may be corrected before release.

Ultimately if it's rubbish then it's rubbish. If it's ok then it's ok, but will we be happy with that? If it's fantastic then some will still gripe. IL2 spoiled us for so long our expectations are now sky high - maybe that's our problem.

Hood

I would choose "flying on rails" over innacurate super duper roll rates and instant turns without a slight rudder touch or dives over 1 kmh without punishment...

On a serious note, I think CLODs FM isnt perfect but its best up to date...thats all.



and btw, on russian forum it was already said the FMs of current aircarft is final minus trim in LAGG.....so BF109 is more or less what we will have and it aint pretty IMHO.


on a side note, when ROF started we were all excited...ROF fans...there was a lot of attention for FMs....later, it was all less important.



ehhh

[Mastiff]

Yes, only hammering FM for other 6 aeroplanes because il-2 and Ju-87 are finished.

Look, I expected FM to be good.

And when you are talking about smoking I quoted devs.

well it is Russia; on a side note; in a real aircraft trim is dependent on speed, so you set your throttle to the speed of knots then trim; your traveling at to level flight, you add more speed you have to trim again....So your constantly trimming the aircraft, this is why I state the FM is not fully complete, now whether or not that's your definition of FM 90% or 100% to me a plane with out trim is at 50%..

[vranac]

109 has a stabilizer. And it's very capable aeroplane.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SveBPF6AN0

[LuseKofte]

I kind of like what I see in BOS. And I flown IL2 since it came out.
I think this will be great addition, what expectation I had to a 1 map sim is the same as I got for clod, surprises and disapointment.
It is still a great deal with clod that I miss, and I am sure there will be on BOS

[Tvrdi]

I want to say that I dont have anything against moderators at BOS forum. Rama, Flatspin (who got me banned) and Bearcat are long time IL2 fans. But as was stated before, 777 policiy there is to delete almost every post which is not praising the sim, which is criticism (true or not. doesnt matter). This I cant and I never will - accept. This is plain wrong. Usually I dont reveal PM talks (not a gentlemans move) but its indicative how bitter (and mean?) was a reaction over PM by Flatspin because I posted this topic here. I suppose he would be the happiest man in the world If he could delete this here. Im sick of their arrogancy in general, specialy of Jason Williams who even got me banned on SimHQ where I was a long time member and never insulted anyone...but hes got friends there.
Earlier Bliss mentioned LukeFF, Hooves (who even threaten me over PM) etc...I really dont care for some arse lickers who are Jasons intimuses and who will (without infractions) bash every forum member because he has a different opinion...but they are very annoying ppl. They will "bury" their own "child". Their fanatism and diehardfanboy-ism is unmaginable and it was really sad to read what Hooves was writing about ATAG (disgusting things). What an unhonorable and mean ppl they are.
With this I would like to close this topic because we said everything and now its really time to move on.

[Tycoon]

I want to say that I dont have anything against moderators at BOS forum. Rama, Flatspin (who got me banned) and Bearcat are long time IL2 fans. But as was stated before, 777 policiy there is to delete almost every post which is not praising the sim, which is criticism (true or not. doesnt matter). This I cant and I never will - accept. This is plain wrong. Usually I dont reveal PM talks (not a gentlemans move) but its indicative how bitter (and mean?) was a reaction over PM by Flatspin because I posted this topic here. I suppose he would be the happiest man in the world If he could delete this here. Im sick of their arrogancy in general, specialy of Jason Williams who even got me banned on SimHQ where I was a long time member and never insulted anyone...but hes got friends there.
Earlier Bliss mentioned LukeFF, Hooves (who even threaten me over PM) etc...I really dont care for some arse lickers who are Jasons intimuses and who will (without infractions) bash every forum member because he has a different opinion...but they are very annoying ppl. They will "bury" their own "child". Their fanatism and diehardfanboy-ism is unmaginable and it was really sad to read what Hooves was writing about ATAG (disgusting things). What an unhonorable and mean ppl they are.
With this I would like to close this topic because we said everything and now its really time to move on.

You know you never answered my earlier question and you are still posting like this?!

Edit: Although I really am sorry you got banned at sim hq.

[ATAG_Snapper]

Folks, let's please leave other forums' business to the other forums. What they say or do regarding their sim, their forum, is not our business over here at the ATAG Forum. This section is for discussion of the Battle of Stalingrad flight simulation itself. Although I am not an early purchaser I still hope it does extremely well for the sake of those who HAVE invested, and for the WW2 combat flight sim genre as a whole.

So.....are the Lagg roll rates a bit optimistic? :devilish:

:)

[Mastiff]

@ Snapper you will find this info a bit interesting..



" Mustang Founder "

Posts: 435


Posted Today, 12:08


No need to worry about this guys . the delay is a very small thing.



The pilots's manual La 5 FN says,

You can fly more than 4-5 minutes at 100 % throttle + boost at 2500 RPM

You can dive at 2600 RPM for 30 seconds up to 600 Kms /H



But you can not open fire above 2400 RPM, or you will hit the propeller. 2400 rpm is the limit.

You can not shoot in dive , and you can not shoot in a chase at full power.



This is a big problem,

A small delay in the Bf 109 is not a problem.

there talk'en about firing delayed mechanism in the 109s MG's..

[Tycoon]

I am getting ready to put a bounty on the lagg 3 roll rate lol snapper.

[Mastiff]

according to the various research papers the Lagg had a great roll rate.

[Tycoon]

according to the various research papers the Lagg had a great roll rate.

Which research papers? could you give a source?

[Tvrdi]

Which research papers? could you give a source?

resource is papa smurf

[Screamadelica]

Ahh, Papa Smurf, he is very wise in the village...:grandpa

[Foul Ole Ron]

I am getting ready to put a bounty on the lagg 3 roll rate lol snapper.

Better put one out on the 109 roll rate too while you're at it! Full aileron rolls are about a second too quick across all speeds. But they do seem to be addressing the 109 flight model in general over the past couple of releases so we'll see what comes down the line.

There's a ton more data available for WW2 planes compared with WW1 so they have less wiggle room in general to get things wrong and they have boxed themselves into a corner by publicly stating that their FMs will be as good as DCS for accuracy to the real things.

[9./JG52_J-HAT]

roflmao (papasmurf comments)

On a serious note, was that really like that, Mastiff or is it a bug with the La-5? If it was really like that and it got modelled, that's cool!
I was following the delay thread for the 109 but it wasn't going anywhere. Did they finally answer wether it's supposed to be like that?

[Tvrdi]

Better put one out on the 109 roll rate too while you're at it! Full aileron rolls are about a second too quick across all speeds. But they do seem to be addressing the 109 flight model in general over the past couple of releases so we'll see what comes down the line.

There's a ton more data available for WW2 planes compared with WW1 so they have less wiggle room in general to get things wrong and they have boxed themselves into a corner by publicly stating that their FMs will be as good as DCS for accuracy to the real things.

Theyve stated so many similar things in the past....

I can say I have the biggest...

and that doesnt have to be the true..only my hardcore fan base consisted of hypnotised beautful women will belive such a thing out of the box....

[vranac]

according to the various research papers the Lagg had a great roll rate.

Really ?


Общая оценка истребителя.


ЛаГГ-3 как истребитель оказался несколько не адекватным. Прежде всего, самолет обладал недостаточной максимальной скоростью полета, величина которой к тому же снижалась от серии к серии. Снижение скоростных характеристик самолета связано с ухудшением технологической дисциплины на заводах и ростом массы вследствие установки бронеспинки, дополнительных топливных баков, радиостанции. На 50% у серийных самолетов по сравнению с прототипом упала скороподъемность.
Основной вклад в снижение летных характеристик внесло производство. Совпало слишком много неблагоприятных факторов: эвакуация авиационных заводов на Восток, нехватка материалов, снижение квалификации рабочих. Очень часто отмечались такие дефекты как несоединенные трубопроводы. Отсутствие ряда болтов и заклепок, забытый в самолетах инструмент. Резко снизилось качество отделки внешних поверхностей планера, следствием чего стал рост лобового сопротивление и падение скорости полета. Управление истребителем было затяжелено, угловая скорость крена - явно недостаточна, на пикировании машина сильно вибрировала. Не все ладно обстояло и с моторами Климова. Они постоянно грелись и "плевались" маслом. Слой масла провоцировал налипание грязи на планер, что в еще большей степени увеличивало лобовое сопротивление. Масло на фонаре кабины ограничивало обзор летчику порой до такой степени, что тот ничего не мог увидеть в прицеле.

roll rate - is clearly insufficient

[Tycoon]

What does that say in english?

[vranac]

That's "Overall rating of a fighter areoplane (LaGG-3)"

It says about difficulties in the production mainly.

Whole sentence: " Control of a aeroplane was difficult, roll rate - is clearly insufficient,in a dive machine vibrated strongly."

[Tycoon]

Ah, sorry misunderstood. So inefficient roll rate, definitely not in bos. There is still a bounty on the number lol.

[LuseKofte]

What the fu** does the Lagg roll rate has anything to bother with. Can someone tell me what to use it for. I am still getting murdered flying one and has in no way found any use of this famous roll rate.
Sitting on a 109 I shoot the lags down as sitting ducks no matter of the roll rate. I am so fed up with the is roll rate thing that I will not roll a lagg as long as I live :P

[Mastiff]

so with rudder authority the roll rate wasn't sufficient? I can roll the shit out of the Lagg3 in BOS.. So who's right? Pretrovich he said "what Petrovich says is what is real".. So who's right?


:doh:

[Tycoon]

Are you kidding lg1?
This is a flight sim, flight should be modelled correctly. I know exactly what you are talking about with the lagg roll rate not given
it an advantage in game, which is why i want a number to see if mabey it
is like that for a reason.

[Wulf]

What the fu** does the Lagg roll rate has anything to bother with. Can someone tell me what to use it for. I am still getting murdered flying one and has in no way found any use of this famous roll rate.
Sitting on a 109 I shoot the lags down as sitting ducks no matter of the roll rate. I am so fed up with the is roll rate thing that I will not roll a lagg as long as I live :P


In my experience, (limited as it is) of all the air combat maneuvers, roll is probably the most misunderstood and least used. Obviously we all know how to roll an aircraft around its axis but as you say, how does that help you when someone is behind you lobbing cannon rounds at you?? The answer is, if that's all you do, then roll will do nothing for you at all. However, when roll is used in combination with your 'elevator' it suddenly allows you to very rapidly and very abruptly change direction. If the aircraft lobbing cannon shells at you doesn't roll as well, or is going faster than you and for that reason, can't roll as quickly, then you should be able to a) get out of its way and b) maybe even escape or kill it.

Generally speaking, from what I've seen, if people use roll at all, they tend to use it when scissoring - which is a perfectly valid use. It's also required for a 'Split S', for example. However, from what I have seen it is seldom used for much else. I could be wrong but that is what I've personally observed when watching fights.

If you aren't currently using roll and want to add it to your list of tricks, try this. If you get something nasty, like a Spit, rapidly closing on your tail and you have no prospect of out running him, take your aircraft into a modest flat turn to bleed off a bit of speed and as you do so watch him carefully as he closes on you and starts to turn inside you for what he imagines will be an easy kill. At this point he should be looking at you, in your cockpit in 3/4 plan view. When you judge that he's about to start shooting quickly roll your aircraft almost 180 degrees (towards him) so that he is now looking at your underside (if he could actually see you - which he probably wouldn't at this point) and you're looking at the ground, and carefully pull your control column back towards you as hard as you can without stalling - and you will be right on the edge when you do this. If he does nothing at this point you will now be heading in opposite directions. If he tries too hard to roll with you he will stall. In any even, no matter what he does, he has probably lost visual contact with you which suddenly gives you a number of options you didn't have 30 seconds ago. Obviously, in a contest with a Spitfire for example, this works best with an aircraft like the FW 190 but it can be done quite successfully, but to a lesser extent, in the Bf 109.

If I've misunderstood what you meant just ignore this.. :D

[Tycoon]

Lol Wulf, generally speaking if I have a spit with more speed coming up behind me I have yet to find a move to counter that.:)

[LuseKofte]

http://i919.photobucket.com/albums/ad32/finno2/2014_2_13__9_19_32_zps227ebba9.png

You guys wqant a historical flightsim and I want simply one that feel right and give everybody a fair chance. The LAGG feel more real than any we got in CLOD. I really like flying it. But regardless I find myself in the same situation in BOS as I very often do here

[Tycoon]

http://i919.photobucket.com/albums/ad32/finno2/2014_2_13__9_19_32_zps227ebba9.png

You guys wqant a historical flightsim and I want simply one that feel right and give everybody a fair chance. The LAGG feel more real than any we got in CLOD. I really like flying it. But regardless I find myself in the same situation in BOS as I very often do here

Sure, and the lagg does feel really good, I'm looking forward to it all.:D

P.S. what happened, blown engine? lol

[LuseKofte]

Exactly the same result :ind:

http://i919.photobucket.com/albums/ad32/finno2/2014_2_13__9_50_40_zps16ebce64.png

http://i919.photobucket.com/albums/ad32/finno2/2014_2_13__9_51_11_zpsfc4a4f89.png

[LuseKofte]

My bad spotting, allowed a 109 into my tail flying level

[gavagai]

You guys wqant a historical flightsim and I want simply one that feel right and give everybody a fair chance. The LAGG feel more real than any we got in CLOD. I really like flying it. But regardless I find myself in the same situation in BOS as I very often do here

I appreciate your honesty. This is what I've been saying all along. The BoS community is only interested in halfway-simulation. BoS will never compare to DCS, where it takes 4+ seconds to aileron roll the P-51 thank you very much.

[LuseKofte]

Yes you might call it half way, but DCS really does not give you anything else than a nice pit and a very realistic procedure in my opinion. The feel of flight is not more realistic than any of them other and the graphic is horrible. And fighting P-51 vs P-51 . Well that just isn't immersion.

My point is not getting it realistic, but most of us does not know the difference if the roll rate is a bit off. I flown and own all Sims there is, make no mistake, I like realism. But still I can enjoy some fun too, spending 10 minutes on settings for a flight give me pleasure once in a while but all the time not.
http://i919.photobucket.com/albums/ad32/finno2/Mobile%20Uploads/2014-01/83FFF0F7-4E37-4CF8-B2FA-0FF4103D1977_zpsgnzolm7h.jpg
This setup pretty much sums up my opinion on realism.

So when I say my opinion as a BOS community member it is not to feed you high end super simmers need to patronizing us lower forms of life. It is simply a wish for a varied and good selection of flightsims. I can live with BOS as is together with CLOD and IL2 46 and on occasions DCS.
And that is my point

[9./JG52_J-HAT]

Is that your "pit", Jaeger? really nicely done!

I just noticed, in BoS, the pilots have normal heads.

[Foul Ole Ron]

That's all fair enough - different people want different things. There's those of us who want BOS to deliver on their promises such as from Han who said that it'll be highly accurate FMs with advanced flight modelling on a par with DCS. If we see gaps we'll call them out and make no apologies about it.

I like the general feeling of flight and ground handling in BOS so hopefully they'll continue improving the flight dynamics and other areas to more closely match the real things. They do seem to be working in that area as the 109 is getting a bit more believable over the past couple of releases. I don't think what we're looking for really conflicts with what you're looking for - so long as it feels realistic fly and the game is fun you'll be happy seems to be where you're coming from. If BOS develop the FMs so they're very close to the real things I think it'll still be fun for you and would also be of interest to us which would make for a bigger playerbase. I think that's where they missed a trick with ROF as if they'd pushed the FM accuracy higher there'd still be a strong online community but it's died out as the hardcore fans that keep these things going got tired of the inaccuracies and went on to other sims.

[gavagai]

Nice pit, but that is irrelevant here.

I can't believe you're actually defending an intentional FM fudge. That is what your position amounts to. Not doing something about something that is obviously wrong is the same as intending it to be wrong, after all.

[Tvrdi]

Well, oranges and apples. Like I said, with past experiences with ROF Im pretty sure BOS would be "red orchestra 2" of flight sims and modded CLOD (and DCS 44 probably even more) will be "ARMA" of flight sims. Not the best comparision but youll get what I was trying to say. ANd BTW, old il2 was closer to CLOD (in its time) than BOS thats for sure.
But like I said...BOS is still in alpha so we will see what will be....superproduction or details and study FM

[Hood]

I appreciate your honesty. This is what I've been saying all along. The BoS community is only interested in halfway-simulation. BoS will never compare to DCS, where it takes 4+ seconds to aileron roll the P-51 thank you very much.

That's a sweeping generalisation. Must confess I'm only interested in the game having the FMs, DMs, weapon characteristics and CEM as close to real life as is possible, with graphics etc being the icing on the cake. I'm not really interested in engine start-up procedure or twiddling radio knobs to get the right channel.

I don't understand the comparison with DCS and the reference to the roll rate of the P51. I'm presuming this is in relation to the LaGG 3 roll rate "issue". The P51 is far better documented and as far as I know there are no roll rates figures out there for the LaGG 3. You acknowledge that you haven't seen any in another thread so must presumably base this on... what precisely?


Hood

[LuseKofte]

I dont defend anything, I like what I see for now, but my expectation was set upon how I know ROF. And I see they are about right. If you expected as DCS with good graphic I can see you are disappointed.
But as is everybody is out of their mind based on expectations that now one can achieve. And they are judging a sim that by experience to its audience never should have been releast until finished.
Because a more judgmental and moralist society , you can not find anywhere else. I am basically totally alone in here aware that I am actually not a real pilot and I do not put my life in real danger flying a sim.
Let the damn game be finished before you scream I say. And you are the first ever to refers it should be even close in realism to DCS. And if it was I would not buy it. The setup interface in that game make me puke and I give away to anyone interested my part of that game.

[1lokos]

I can't believe you're actually defending an intentional FM fudge. That is what your position amounts to. Not doing something about something that is obviously wrong is the same as intending it to be wrong, after all.

Some people report problems with the "famous FM/physics":

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/2085-flight-and-damage-models-physics/page-3

Sokol1

[Tycoon]

I say again this is a flight sim, fm should be as accurate as they can make it. I really like a lot of the features and qualities of this sim and if some of this stuff is ironed out it would appeal to a lot of other simmers, the devs have stated that the plans fly as they should, if they just showed the data for the lagg 3 roll rate for example and it showed they were right then fine, thats what we want. ROF is one of my favorite games (and its not "dead") and I am expecting a lot of the same out of BOS, but the fm thing is unfortunately thorn in the foot.

P.S. and gav please stop sweeping the entire BOS community under the rug by saying "the BOS community is only interested in half-simulation, you're just wrong, many people including me want them to be accurate, that's partly why I play COD and DCS.

[LuseKofte]

I really wish for a accurate and realistic fligntmodel, I do. Most of all a realistic bomb aim device that make dropping bombs a challenge. I am afraid that will not happened.
I am not sure, because there are some physics in this game that feel just right.
In my opinion there should be possibilities for the best game physics to date if the FM is correct.
Because the good feeling I got flying the LAGG tells me there are only minor tweaks to make that happened. I do not want another war thunder. But the rhetoric on this topic make people believe the game is rubbish.
In the sense of game physics this game do in some degree succeed CLOD