Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

27 Excellent

1 Follower

About CAFulcrum

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Joining the remote and isolated tribe of a Storch/Grasshopper supporters here. Especially if it includes the introduction of artillery. Americans relied pretty heavily on it in Europe and FC needs it as well. Going to be a lot of disappointed aroda-mossie-ites if that's the case though : D
  2. I'm not at all saying I won't support the game, I'm was more than happy to support ROF through the years and keep finding excuses to throw my money at this sim. It is silly to be all or nothing over 4 engine bombers. My point is I do think there's more than enough 'business potential' for them to invest in the B17, and that the issues that keep the B17 from being modeled need to be addressed anyhow. What good is modeling the ai gunners so intensely now when everyone complains about them as being too accurate and not behaving realistically? Why do they take so many more resources to model than they did in other games in the past, what could have possibly changed wrt the coding of gun positions to make them so much more memory intensive? And what is the point of modeling ai planes at as high a fidelity as the player when 1) we don't have ai that puts that performance to full use as it is (though it's good to see work being done, but honestly what needs to be done with ai is not getting the best performance out of an aircraft but behaving in a realistic tactical way to the situation.) and 2) it's completely unneeded for bombers that are either going to fly straight or go down in flames. Enemy fighters the player is engaged with, I can see the logic in, but why do it for aircraft that are 20km away and could just be represented with a simpler FM that approximates what they're doing? The thing is this game relies on continuous development, and if it starts having limitations they will start running out of 'appropriate' battles to model and as the game grows with more aircraft more people will want more battles that won't be doable. I mean, how are they going to ever model battleships or carriers when each one has batteries of dozens of AA guns? Are the guns on ships at the moment given the same ai as planes? I think they could also easily generate interest and sales just with a flyable B17, on account of its iconic status. If they could make an entire game series on the B17 in the 90s I doubt they're going to have trouble attracting interest. Then they can open to other large aircraft in other campaigns. In the mean time I think the advantage of being able to show larger numbers of airplanes would itself make a huge improvement for the sim and open it up a lot more to realistic large scale aerial battles. I am enjoying this game immensely for what it is, and I hope it's doing well with its business model. The product is definitely superior and worth the money. I just have to say when you play it there is a feeling of lost potential, and like you're doing something loosely representative of the war that's just made to give you something to do, and I'd like to see the game achieve as much as it can because the alternatives right now are basically arcades like war thunder that will never give you the FM and graphical immersion that BoX provides. It's kind of between older games like Warbirds, Airwarrior, 1946, targetware that had a ton of WWII aircraft with no limitations and DCS which is a one plane at a time venture. I worry something else with the same graphical look and an inferior FM modeling system, like Microsoft combat flight simulator could easily wipe it out if it had any sort of monetary backing, and I feel like the game could be a lot more popular if it fielded a more robust single player experience and something a little more gamey/grindy just to keep a sense of achievement in the game. It is ultimately their decision though, no one is making demands here... so far they seem to have made the right ones. Whatever keeps development going and money coming in seems to be the deciding factor in the success of these games, despite forumite rebellions and individual ultimatums...
  3. That's awesome but I'm talking more about the approach to target leg (before the IP) and going over front lines. With the U2 it seems to take forever and seems kind of pointless, and it feels really dangerous if you get caught in the lights. Seems easier to evade them flying low but I don't know if engine noise is a factor in detection. In the HS129 career it seems like there's usually one or two that get shot down by flak when crossing the front. But is small arms fire safer? Haven't they added gunfire to the cities and forests along the front if you fly too low? Or should it not be a factor for the armored HS129? Also (sorry for tangent) why does it always lose all of its fuel when getting a leak, are the tanks all connected? Every time I get a fuel leak all three tanks seem to drain.
  4. Hi, wondering what altitude is best to fly on approach to target in career mode when flying low level attack aircraft like the il2, hs129 or u2. Is the 1km height usually assigned in career missions historical? I thought the usual tactic for attack aircraft was to fly in low and only pop up at the last moment, but can see reasons why you might want to come in with a little alt (better initial attack speed or stance for dive bombing, ability to glide back in case of damage, not being 'heard' by ground units or shot by small arms fire). What do most here do once they get squadron commander or start leading flights?
  5. There's just something that seems ridiculous about not being able to model heavy bombers in a world war two flight sim, at this point in time, when it's been done literally every sim before. Imo they are going to have to decide to invest in creating simplified FMs and planes that won't be flyable by the player just to populate the single player experience or it is going to start feeling more and more lacking. It worked okay for the eastern front, and might for PTO but again how can you have a western front wwii flight sim without the B17, B24 or lancaster in any shape or form?
  6. Have you seen this one? At 14:30 there's a video of one performing a barrel roll where one of the engines cuts out, with bad results. The way the guy talks about them they don't sound like something easy to fly, but something with thin thresholds and some very bad stall characteristics. It looks like the torque completely takes over the aircraft once he looses one engine. https://youtu.be/J6uDpyScWg0
  7. Go with ptomnik squadron once the pocket closes, most missions are more or less instant action and it gets more intense as the pocket closes. It's usually helpful to look at how close the squadron is to the front lines as the career progresses at the initial timeline where you choose your squad. Some are positioned way back.. You can change squadrons by transferring on the map portion of the career as well.
  8. Type of improvement: Aircraft improvement Explanation of proposals: HS129 has an incorrect description of the fuel lever, should read similar to what the p40/p39 has (full, auto rich, auto lean, off), and can we please have the 30mm cannon assignable as a separate weapon, now that the coding has been brought in for FC aircraft. It could literally be assigned to any of the extra gun options Benefits: The HS129 is a collector's plane, so the flight spec error is pretty glaring and being able to shoot the 30mm on its own would be much more historical and easier to use. I can't see these fixes being terribly costly either.
  9. Type of improvement: UI/Gameplay Explanation of proposal: update QMB: give more options with regard to the type of aircraft encountered in 'random allies/axis aircraft' ie random fighter, random bomber, random WWI aircraft. Eliminating the tendency of the same aircraft (pe2s and he111s especially) to repeatedly spawn in the random aircraft selection. Option to limit random aircraft to your aircraft's expansion or time period. Giving ai bombers in QMB a waypoint so that they don't try to dogfight the player, so that they behave closer to what you find in career. Benefit: more utility in QMB for training for career, better options for players and making the random aircraft selection viable for WWI aircraft.
  10. Yay Biff! Didn't realize it had a stab-trim. Flies very well, can't wait for a map/career to fly it in. The cl2 is a hoot as well. Thank you!
  11. When flying the DVa, putting it into tight turns, it seems like you can pull the stick back completely without any penalty or having to worry about it stalling for quite some time if you start the turn from full speed. I vaguely remember this in other sims as well though; how the DVa feels quite maneuverable until you face against a camel and suddenly feel sluggish. The in game ai doesn't fly the camels well so you can defeat them in basically anything but I know a human pilot can accomplish very sudden turns with them. With the DVa it almost feels like there's a limiter stopping the elevator from pushing the plane into stall or achieving high alpha turns. It doesn't shudder or stall or anything. I'm just wondering if it's raelistic/historical. Did the designers simply not give the elevator or stick enough throw? Or is there some aerodynamic reason for how well the tail works? Pilot accounts aren't very good for the plane, and the tailplane definitely looks odd -- no other aircraft seem to have adopted it, and it looks like it has way too much area extending forward. But I'd expect to feel a kind of a deadening at the extremes (presumably as the tailplane stalls), so I'm wondering if it's an FM issue or something mechanical?
  12. I would like to see the hs123 since it was so numerous and played such a major role as a ground attack aircraft. It would make a nice collector's plane since it doesn't necessarily tie into any specific battle or time frame. Same with the Storch and possibly the fw189. The rest are a mix of wunderweapons, night fighters and bombers that aren't really in place yet but might make for a good X in the BoX tradition. Like a Dambusters or Battle over Berlin pack that could also introduce heavy bombers for them to destroy. Having something like the me410 right now would be kind of pointless.
  13. A mod called 'Criquet's AI Mod' fixed that behavior, so the coding was still there.
  14. On second thought I think I'm mistaking the constant switching of an indicator for left and right that happens in some of the planes (russian and german, or any with a wing tank).
  15. I have a pair of "eagle eyes" sunglasses that I use to fly my drone, that blocks out blue light and it increases my visibility and ability to track and find the drone dramatically. I don't know if they had that sort of filter back then (it's yellow, not orange or green or black) but in general I haven't seen a flight sim or even video game that accurately modeled sun glare and how the human eye responds to it. Basically the reduction of sunlight is supposed to allow your pupils to dilate, allowing for better visual perception of light not filtered out, but how you translate that into computer simulation projecting an image on your screen is probably too difficult to overcome. I remember ROF lightening and dimming the monitor to sort of simulate this but it just looked kind of weird. Maybe it's not possible in the sim to simulate the 'negative' filtering and instead just uses an overlay of the color. Edit: sorry, didn't realize you were talking about the fw190.
  • Create New...