Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Fritz_X

  1. Sorry to burst your bubble, but you won't. The tank museum (apart from the fact that it wasn't present in WW2, of course) is located in Munster. The city we got in BOBP is Münster. Only two small dots, but still a whole different place 😉 Great DD, just as always!
  2. Guys, please take your time to re-read Cat's initial post about the canopy differences. He said that he has troubles to spot the differences between the two variants of the same canopy type. What he is trying to communicate is that he feels like the differences between Early Flat Canopy and Common Flat Canopy are hard to spot for him, just as well as the differences between Rare Blown Canopy and Common Blown Canopy. Everybody is free to disagree with him, but nobody should act like he said that flat and blown canopy styles look the same, which he never did. Anyway, great DD just as always and nice to hear about both canopy styles becoming available.
  3. Simple answer: All of the above. The only product of the whole IL-2 (both classic and BoX) I never owned was Pacific Fighters, which I caught up later on by getting 1946. The only module from RoF I never bought was the final Ilya Muromets DLC, for both included planes didn't really interest me. I don't play 1946, Clod nor RoF anymore, though. As much as I love them (especially 1946, for it will always have a special place in my heart for accompanying me through all of my teenage years), they simply can't keep up with BoX.
  4. Even if I always prefered flying the Alatross D.Va, the Pfalz D.III will always have a special place in my heart, for it once saved my virtual life when most likely no other plane would have: I was flying in SP over the French Coast on the Channel map one afternoon, fighting against several hostile fighters (don't remember which type of plane I was facing), when one enemy hit me with a massive burst from his MG's, damaging the wings on my left badly. They almost snapped off immediately, putting my plane into a dive from about 1,5 km's height. Shortly after, the wings on my right snapped off as well, only leaving me with the small part of the upper wing right over my motor section, as I kept diving straight to my doom. I hit the pause button. My plane was lost. All the wings were gone, I was plummeting towards the ground, no reason to continue. For whatever reason though, I decided to take it like a man, so I unpaused the game again and prepared to go down in style: Full throttle towards the ground. After reaching a speed of about 280 km/h at about 250 metres above the ground, the magic of the Pfalz happened: The plane started to slowly pull up, finally going into a stable level flight and then into a shallow descent. With very gentle moves to my elevator controls I was able to safely land the plane on a field, with no wings left, but a virtual life all safe. I'm positive that this was a one-time-bug, since I never had been able to recreate this situation. But boy, this gave me some good laughs and one of the weirdest looks of disbelief I must have ever had.
  5. Not really. The AI in 1946 definitely was worse. It only felt better on the first glance because the devs gave it a different flight model than the player had to deal with. The AI in 1946 had a much more forgiving flight model that allowed them to pull off manouvers the human player wouldn't be able to do in the very same situation. In BoX the AI has to deal with the same complex flight model the player has to cope with. Which is more fair, but also more demanding to the AI, which seems to not be able to fully cope with it, yet. The devs definitely decided to take the hard route for BoX, which is something we should really appreciate.
  6. I wholeheartedly agree. This goes not only for competitive MP environments, but also SP games. Back in 2007 the game 'S.T.A.L.K.E.R. - Shadow of Chernobyl' added a misfire / gun jam mechanism. I was really looking forward to this, since it would add a new layer of realism. But in the end, all it did was creating frustration. You played a mission and were almost done, but low on energy and there were still some enemies left to deal with. You spotted them from a cover, they didn't realize your presence yet. You made a plan in your mind how to take them out, you checked your weapon one last time, mag's full, 30 rounds will do the trick. You left your cover, opened fire... ... and then the game decided to give you the digital middle finger by making your gun misfire after the second round, giving the remaining enemies a free kill on you while you were a sitting duck out in the open. Random events can be implemented, as long as their consequences aren't too harsh and can be dealt with in an easy way. I really enjoy the misfire mechanism in RoF, which puts the player into a disadvantage as well, but can be dealt with within the blink of an eye. Things like gun jams however I feel like would do more harm than good.
  7. I both agree and disagree with this statement. What I agree with is the word 'seems' in your second sentence. The rest, I basically disagree with. AI is a very tough subject. It always has been, but I agree with you that things seem to be getting worse as time progresses and games evolve. Many of today's games that feature AI in single player seem to have it executed worse than we used to remember things from 'back in the day'. Many players agree: AI has gotten worse overall. And this is a statement I have to strongly disagree with. Yes, I do agree that AI more and more tends to feel lacking. But this has nothing to do with it not evolving or even becoming worse. It is all about games evolving faster than AI does. As time progresses, games become more and more complex, to give players a better and more detailed environment to play with. Unfortunately this also gives the AI the task to deal with the same mechanisms, which is hard to code at times, especially giving the technical limitations of a home computer system. Just go back in time and have a look at one of the very first games that allowed a human player to play against an AI opponent: Pong. The AI basically had only two things to do there, namely A) to realize the 'ball's' direction and calculate its' further path and B) move the paddle accordingly. And now compare this to the complexity of our flight sim. I agree with you when you say that the AI in BoX has alot of quirks and that there's quite alot of room for improvement. What nags me personally the most is the 360° view of AI pilots and the godlike aim of AAA and gunners on higher levels. But I still do admire the devs for what they have created so far and especially for chosing the hard way by deciding to give the AI the very same tasks and limitations the player has to deal with. They could have just taken the easy way out, like it happened back with classic IL2, where the AI had a different, much more favorable flight model that allowed it to pull off manouvers that made them look like TIE-Fighters instead of WW2 planes. Another good (or should I say 'bad'?) example for a favored AI is Sid Meier's Civilization series, where the AI doesn't get smarter on higher levels, but will be granted with several boni (like more starting ressources, more ressources from new conquered sources, shorter building times for units and cities, etc.) that the player doesn't get. One could basically say, that human players are playing against bad players that compensate their lack of skill by cheating. Giving the AI artificial advantages over the human player only 'improves' the situation until the sharade is discovered by players. From there on, all it creates is disappointment and frustration. Because flying a WW2 plane against TIE-Fighters just isn't fun, even though Lucas Art's 'Secret Weapons over Normandy' literally tried to convince us otherwise.
  8. Absolutely amazing what major impact these little things can have when it comes to immersion. My personal favorite was the reply of the German bomber crews upon the arrival of their fighter escorts: "Holla, die Jäger! Wir sind froh euch zu sehen! Danke für das Geleit, Ende!" Which roughly translates into: 'Hooray, the fighters! We are glad to see you! Thanks for the cover, over!' I really wish we could have things like this back on our ingame radio. And now I'll stop derailing this thread, promised.
  9. If this is true, I'll stand corrected and rest my case. To be honest, I'm not a video editor myself, but I never saw mock gun cam footage from BoX so far, compared to the many videos from the classic IL-2. I believe your words there, though.
  10. I'd really like to see this feature again, since a hidden cockpit would give video creators the chance to easily recreate gun cam footage. Even if the 'hardcore simmers' might disagree, it basically wouldn't hurt anyone. And neither it would hurt the sim itself. As long as you implement it as an option, that is. This would require a server side 'Always render cockpits' option, to keep things fair and balanced in MP.
  11. Phew, tough question... On the first glance I'd also think it'll be 40.-$, consisting of the 10.-$ base discount plus the 5.-$, 10.-$ and 15.-$ for each level, but only if you spent more than 201.-$ that is. On the second look things could be seen differently: Fact is, you will always get the 10,-$ base discount. If you also bought RoF content, you will get an additional discount, but without the three different levels stacking up. Which would give you the following discounts: Level 1: 15,-$ (10,-$ base discount + 5,-$ Level 1 RoF content discount) Level 2: 20,-$ (10,-$ base discount + 10,-$ Level 2 RoF content discount) Level 3: 25,-$ (10,-$ base discount + 15,-$ Level 3 RoF content discount) I honestly feel like this is how it's meant to work.
  12. Simple answer for me: Albatros DV.a. Together with the Nieuport 17 the latest Albatros iteration was my favorite ride back in RoF. Really glad it made it right into the first Volume of FC. That being said, I hope we'll get the Nieuport eventually just as well.
  13. William of Ockham agrees with you. Me too, by the way.
  14. I have to agree with Trup. The way the AI currently handles the SPAD is pretty much how it should be flown, especially against a much slower opponent like the Dr.1. Of course I can't say if this behaviour is exactly as the devs planned it or if the current AI routine just shows this behaviour 'by accident', which actually doesn't really matter, since the outcome feels very believable. I for myself enjoy it alot. Yes, of course it is tougher to down a SPAD that only goes for energy fighting, but why should the AI try to outturn a Dr.1 in a SPAD anyway? No halfway experienced player would do that and AI-wise we already had enough of this back in RoF.
  15. The AI is far better in comparison to RoF: - No more descending to ground level: The AI doesn't automatically descend anymore, fights at higher altitudes are actually possible. - No more left turn only: The AI makes use of different kind of manouvers. It still does turn fighting then and now, but most of the time I see them doing vertical manouvers. They also fly scissors occasionally. - No more sniper-like marksmanship: The AI isn't capable of sending a precise stream of bullets right into your pilot from great distances anymore, reducing the frustration of instant deaths. There seems to be a problem with AI SPADs ignoring the presence of the player and simply returning to their home field (seems to happen mostly on the Kuban map), but apart from this flaw, it is a great improvement to what we had to deal with back in RoF.
  16. Good research and very nice data sheet! Thank you! Comparing it to my own experience in FC so far I've got to agree with Space_Ghost: I have not managed to make an enemy engine burst into flames yet.
  17. According to the store page, we will! Even if only ten planes are listed, we are basically getting 13 RoF planes in Vol.1.
  18. Very nice post, Hell! I can agree on quite alot of things, even though I feel like your idea for Vol.3 is a little too ambitious. I just don't think that we'll ever get to see entirely new planes. Hope that I'll be proven wrong sometime in the future... Never getting the Hansa-Brandenburg W.12 would be quite sad, though. By the way, you can add another plane for the Central Powers for your Vol.3 suggestion, since we will already be getting the Fokker D.VIIF as an engine modification for the D.VII in Vol.1.
  19. I always wanted to see the Oeffag Albatros D.III and the Aviatik D.I in RoF. But for FC Vol.2 I feel like it'll contain planes we already have in RoF. Which will hopefully include the Nieuport 17, Breguet 14B2, DFW C.V and maybe even the Hansa-Brandenburg W.12.
  20. Did you actually watch how they returned to their base or did you assume they did after them flying away from you? I experienced the same behaviour when I tried FC for the first time, making me think the AI was bugged and simply ignoring me. The AI seemingly tries to fly the SPAD mainly as an energy fighter. It does only little turn fighting and seems to start attack runs on the player only if the distance to the player is big enough. I experienced how the SPADs returned to attack me after already getting a rather absurd distance away from me.
  21. I'm positive that there's nobody out there who'd like to see RoF's sniping, always aiming for the pilot AI back. Right now I feel like that the AI gunnery could use a buff, especially at veteran and ace level. Flying against 4 ace SPADs all by yourself in a Dr.1 is tons of fun, especially due to the AI making use of lots of different manouvers and for the fact alone that they stay at higher altitudes to fight. But for now it feels like they're not able to hit you properly, even if you fly at average speed in a straight line. I actually tried that out, when I got the feeling that they had major troubles to land their hits on me when I flew combat manouvers. And yes, of course they manage to gun you down after a while, but so far it always took them quite a while to inflict structural damage to my Dr.1, mostly by destroying my upper wing. But so far not a single AI bullet hit my pilot, no matter how hard I tried to be an easy target.
  22. One question: Does the AI not attack you, or does it simply not hit you? What I have experienced so far when it comes to fighting WWI AIs is that the flight behaviour has been greatly improved (AI flies scissors, goes vertical and makes use of the planes individual strengths, like doing less turn fighting in the fast SPAD, etc.), but has lost alot of accuracy when it comes to gunnery, which will hopefully be adressed. Definitely no comparison to the sniper-like marksmanship of RoF's AI.
  23. True and very important point! When I first tried FC on its' release day, I started by flying a Dr.1 against two AI SPADs at veteran level. When I tried to engage them, all they did was running away from me. I tried to chase them, which of course doesn't work in a Dr.1, but I ended the mission after a short and unsuccessful chase. I actually thought that the AI was bugged, simply ignoring my presence. When I tried the same setup again, the SPADs turned heel again, but instead of chasing them I decided to stay in the combat area. To my surprise both SPADs turned around after gathering some distance to me and both started a 'slashing attack' at high speed. After they had passed me, they repeated the same tactic several times. This actually was the first time I witnessed the AI flying a high energy fighter to its' strengths, which is a very welcome improvement.
  24. Please, just give the game some time to evolve. You know it's early access and we just got the first playable build. I can understand your gripes about some bugs, like the shimmering planes when flying in front of clouds, but bugs like the metallic hit sounds are definitely going to be changed as the game progresses. Just remember how things started when BoS was released. The game only had little content and its' fair share of bugs and problems due to several limitations. You can still witness how mixed the game was received on its' initial released, if you check out metacritic and other reviews. But if you look what the game has involved into, you just have to admit that it deserves the name 'Great Battles' like no other simulation does. What I am trying to communicate is: Give it a little time.
  25. To give us the chance of eventually getting more Volumes of FC, the first iteration has to be a financial success. If the first one doesn't make any money, game over. And the best way to make money is to start with those planes that appeal the widest range of players. I can absolutely understand your desire for different or niche planes. I would have loved to see the Nieuport 17 instead the Sopwith Dolphin for example. The Dolphin for me already feels like some kind of niche plane, even if it doesn't come close to something like a flying boat. I hope that FC will be the financial success the devs need it to be to continue to give us the remaining RoF planes as well. And maybe even new machines in the future.
  • Create New...