Jump to content


Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

125 Excellent

1 Follower

About Vig

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

965 profile views
  1. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7359351/Flaming-Russian-jet-carrying-233-people-crash-lands-cornfield.html 221 passengers, full fuel tanks, everyone walks away. That pilot was playing on full-hard difficulty level. Salute to a real hero!
  2. A broken launcher is unacceptable in payware. I'm going to wait for the fix.
  3. The entire question of "what's next" has become a painful one for me. The Pacific was announced and I believed it, buying a lot of stuff I don't use much to support that eventual goal. What I'm looking forward to most now is the WWI game being released. To me, that means 777, and I have a lot of good feelings for those fellows after what they did with Rise of Flight. I would like to be able to follow that project development separately, without reading about a tank game in which I have no interest and which I feel I have somewhat funded by buying the 1C stuff to get to the Pacific only it really was tanks after all. I will possibly buy future 1C developments if they are in my area of interest, but my feelings about the two companies and the reliability of their announcements are very different now, and I would like to see their respective products have their own platforms and forums. Then I will have no reason to check frequently on the development status of 777 projects in these forums. It would save me a lot of irritation.
  4. Online game forums probably did as much to kill the genre as anything. On the airfield, people are brothers. I talked to a Biker for Jesus who does volunteer machinist work on Wright-Cyclone engines for over an hour recently. I would normally been sort of wary of him, because I'm a different sort of geek, but the shared interest overcame everything and we enjoyed each other's company very much. That was real life, face-to-face. Online, a common interest seems to spark as much rancor as camaraderie. My personal opinion is that online forums attract more than their share of vicious, argumentative people who wouldn't say boo to you face-to-face but use the anonymity of the internet to work out their repressed aggression. The arguing and insults in the IL2 forums reached a ridiculous level. Dealing with that sort of person can dampen your enthusiasm for almost anything.
  5. The dedicated naval planes, of course, like the Fulmar and Swordfish - I don't know if the Skua made it to the Med but that one is a favorite of mine as well. Fliegerkorps X would be interesting to me because Stukas and JU-88s would be employed in an anti-shipping role. The SM79 was a standout as a torpedo-carrier, but Italian aircraft in general appeal to me. Part of it is the underdog status of the Regia Aeronautica and Italian forces in general - I am curiously drawn to underdogs and lost causes, but I am also interested in the Italian aircraft themselves. They just have not been covered in the detail that BoX can offer (with the exception of the MC202, of course), and I enjoy the tactical situation posed by the combination of light armament, mediocre speed, and high agility - especially given their opposition in the theater. It would be too much underdog for me against most other opposition, I think! If we were talking about a more open scenario, with all possible forces available, I would very much enjoy exploring the French aircraft available in the theater for much the same reason.
  6. My position is very similar. I really feel no "bond" with either German or Soviet aircraft. I take them up for spins to examine the flight characteristics, but I don't actually play with them because playing is in the head, it is in the imagination, it is a Walter Mitty or Ralphie living out of a fantasy, and I have no Nazi or Soviet fantasies that I want to live out. I bought BOS BOM and BOK almost entirely because I wanted to support further development, reasoning that the original IL2 eventually went to the Pacific, maybe this one will, too, if it succeeds. In retrospect, I would have bought FC in any event, because I enjoyed the original game so much, especially the online flying community. But I would not have purchased BOBP (American planes per se do nothing for me, my thing is naval aviation), and I did not purchase Tank Crew because I simply do not like tank games, and I saw it as a resource-hogging drag on future aircraft development. Once I regarded this series as the focus of my military interest hobbies, but now I have moved on to a long-delayed naval miniatures project that gets most of my gaming budget and attention. I keep watching, and if the Mediterranean or Pacific theaters are developed I will jump back in because those are within my area of interest. But I'm through supporting development in general by buying whatever is released.
  7. I am 67 and have played just about every combat flight sim there ever was. There once was a rule that you only simulate the fun stuff. Larry Holland's games, WW2 and Star Wars alike, were primarily fun shooters with minimal complexity, other than diverting power to keep your shields maxed. The Thirdwire games were similar - sims lite but a lot of fun. Influenced, I think, by the Falcon series, the simulation of the fun stuff became more and more authentic and hit optimal level with complex engine management and carrier ops in IL2. Now the trend is to simulate the not-fun stuff to please the hard-core. We even see not-fun stuff, like ground handling, being made harder than it really is, according to many pilot posters on this site. The most fun I ever had in flight sim from a *game* standpoint was Red Baron II. The career mode was a blast. The career in Mig Alley Ace was nearly as good, The Initial IL2 added multiplayer which was an enormous amount of fun, the excellent mission builder made for a lot of single-player fun, but the attempts at a career mode were pitiful. RoF was a great deal of fun in multi-player, except for the ground handling which I chalked up to some peculiarity of French radial-powered aircraft, and which really didn't matter when you were taking off from a baseball field instead of a runway. I love the models in the present IL2 series and I love being able to actually feel the different flight characteristics of the various aircraft. I have a lot of fun with that, but it is more like a reference work than a game. It may be too hard for me to enjoy, although I would put in more effort if carrier ops were available. I may play online again once RoF2 gets rolling if I can have my Breguet back. As far as the future - well, there will always be a niche market for historical aircraft sims so long as there are PC games. My grandchildren play games on phones and consoles, though, so enjoy them while you've got them.
  8. @69th_Ustio - USS Wasp participated in two operations with the Royal Navy in the Med. These were ferry runs of RAF fighters for Malta, but Wasp flew Wildcat CAPs in both missions, and had an exciting time when one of the Spitfires had to abort and try to land back on Wasp with no hook - it made it, stopping 15 feet from the front end of the flight deck. The USS Ranger was with the Home Fleet at Scapa Flow and flew off an antishipping strike mission to Bodø employing Avengers, Dauntless, and Wildcats in October 1943 (Operation Leader). Tungstun took place the following Spring. So we could get some good use out of a Norway map and aircraft release, and would then have a big jump on Med carrier ops if Japanese planes can't be done. A Med map would be a big deal, probably several parts like Russia, and could sell a lot of airplanes that are a lot more interesting to me, anyway, than late-war uber planes being used in roles they were not designed for.
  9. I would be fine with Tungsten, or with Torch, or RN carrier ops in the Med. The Med with carriers would in some ways be preferable to the Pacific. No Japanese documents required.
  10. This is something that is a big negative to me as well. I mean, why? Just why? All of this work put into something that is inaccurate and not fun, but the mission editor gets no work at all and remains complete kludge to use. Yes, I can and have put in the effort to overcome the ground loop inaccuracy, and I have managed to make the kludgy mission editor work a little, but it is not worth the trouble. The original IL2 was a better game, and after giving this one a lot of time I have concluded that it will never be as much fun as the original. A big disappointment.
  11. You gotta put the cape on dude
  12. The Great Patriotic War in the air was pretty much composed of tactical ground attack and fighter missions to gain or retain air superiority. The air war over Germany in 1944-45 was pretty much high altitude strategic bomber attacks, escort, and interceptions, with a dash of tactical fighter attacks on transportation that increased as the bombing campaign reached its climax. Now we have some Western aircraft in a central European setting but the actual gameplay is still the same sort of thing that has been modelled on the Eastern maps. Now that they've decided to do Germany, they need to include strategic bombing - day and night - or instead just sell airplanes. Air war over Germany *is* strategic bombing.
  13. I've been looking forward to this for years, and I hope that it turns out to be a good game as well as a good simulation. Naval sims are scarce commodities! But I'm positive that Uncle Neal is familiar with every submarine sim that was ever made, and has tried to emulate the fun parts of all of them, as well as adding "The Sims" activity inside the boat. Eager to see.
  14. LOL, welcome aboard, just don't expect any naval aviation of any kind!
  15. Just like the Roc is the love child of the Blackburn Skua and the Boulton Paul Defiant. The Skua, I think, was actually a better weapon than is generally thought, and better use could have been made of it.
  • Create New...