61 People Online on a Saturday.

[BlitzPig_EL]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dumb dev decisions aside is it really impossible to have fun in BOS? 

 

 

I tried to have fun this afternoon. 

 

I joined the DED/Official ranked Expert server.   As the Luftwaffe was under subscribed I picked a Stuka and tried to find the closest VVS airfield to bomb.

 

Within minutes I was totally lost.   Honestly, I just cannot navigate on that featureless, colorless, vast expanse.  I took 100% fuel so I thought I would just keep searching for a target to bomb.

At one point some flak was going off around me, but I could not see where it was coming from, so those Red Army gunners were safe.

I flew around for about 45 minutes (I think), at 3000 meters.

 

Never saw an enemy or friendly aircraft, or anything else for that matter.

 

Got bored and quit.

 

That map is too big and the number of objectives is far too high for the small number of players currently online.

 

From what I saw on the chat bar, the fur ballers were having fun shooting each other.

 

I wonder where they were?

[BraveSirRobin]

You're blaming the game for your inability to navigate?

[BlitzPig_EL]

In a way.

 

Because you can only have full hard or arcade map settings.  Nothing in between, so no way to have just my aircraft on the map.

 

Sure If I flew every day, which I cannot do, I would get better, but I still can't look down at the world and correlate it to the map that takes up the full screen while trying to keep the bloody aircraft flying as well.  Sorry I'm not a god.

 

But even so, I flew around for almost an hour and saw nothing save for some ineffective flak tossed my way.  Trouble usually has a way of finding me, but I was out looking for it and it never showed up.

 

Guess I'll just have to wait for the non winter maps so I can see the topography better. 

 

My points on lack of players, and too many objectives still stands.

 

Currently the game is not satisfying, or even remotely fun to play.  Sorry if you take offense, but that's my experience since release.

[[KWN]T-oddball]

If you think my comments about certain people were aimed at you then that is not the case, I'm just replying to your quotes. 

 

I'm not a fanboy and I don't defend some of the crazy decisions the devs made nor am I totally happy with how things are right now. I spent my entire time in IL2 flying co-ops and was bitterly disappointed when CLOD didn't support the simple system we had and I feel that our community is missing out not having the systems which made this stuff easy as well. All I'm saying is I find there is more to enjoy than to dislike about BOS, I will keep hoping that we get more options in for game play and I do expect them to change tack on unlocks and the graphics settings for example...to not do would be suicide.

 

I flew two missions again tonight and there is so much to love about BOS, It just feels there there are a disproportional number of negative threads which are going to put people off  from giving it a go which in the end will kill off yet another sim.

 

Dumb dev decisions aside is it really impossible to have fun in BOS? 

 

we are on the same page in many ways the difference being i don't see them doing anything now but new maps and planes. the core of the game will stay the way it is.

[=EXPEND=Tripwire]

Nothing in between, so no way to have just my aircraft on the map

 

Previously having your plane show up on the map was a forced setting in expert. There were a number of players that requested the "GPS" functionality be disabled in expert. Now I believe this is a server side option so servers running custom difficulty settings can choose to run with your own plane location shown on the map - but the expert setting has this turned off.

Edited April 6, 2015 by Tripwire

[AvengerSeawolf]

 

 

I flew around for about 45 minutes (I think), at 3000 meters.

 

Perhaps  fly lower  next time. Is difficult to see all these tiny units ( from above) especially if you fly high.

[TG-55Panthercules]

Perhaps  fly lower  next time. Is difficult to see all these tiny units ( from above) especially if you fly high.

 

 

Problem with that is that (based on the research I've done before) the normal/typical altitude to start a bomb run in the Stuka was about 3,000m - so you should be able to fly at that height, see your targets and dive on them.  I too find that incredibly hard to do in BoS, which is a bummer because I would otherwise love flying the Stuka.  Kinda defeats the purpose of flying dive bombers if you have to cruise around at low level in order to see targets.

[BraveSirRobin]

In a way.

 

Because you can only have full hard or arcade map settings.  Nothing in between, so no way to have just my aircraft on the map.

 

 

I'm pretty sure it's a server setting. 

[=CFC=Conky]

I had a whirl on the 'Wings of Freedom' (Wings of Liberty?), anyway, a Russian server. 38 players and not bad at all.

 

Good hunting,

=CFC=Conky

[Feathered_IV]

Navigating isn't that hard. Choose a recognisable landmark (town or woods, not a river) and note it's heading. Fly to that and while on the way choose the next landmark to hop to. Treat it like navigating over the Pacific in PF.

[LoneMerc]

I stopped just before release, just a bit more busy and got tired of the white landscape. I look forward BOM, but I plan to play a bit more before then. Need to find a squadron it's just murder alone.

[unreasonable]

There is no doubt the map design is a major impediment to navigation, much worse than RoF's map system. (Why "fix" what was not broken?) The minimap is just unspeakably horrid, while the "O" map is excellent as such, but having it blot out your entire screen does make it very difficult to check back and forth, which is particularly important when you lose sight of landmarks because of cloud - or just get lost.

 

It would be a huge improvement if we could have a version of the "O" map that just covered say 20% of your screen area in a corner.

Edited April 6, 2015 by unreasonable

[csThor]

Problem with that is that (based on the research I've done before) the normal/typical altitude to start a bomb run in the Stuka was about 3,000m - so you should be able to fly at that height, see your targets and dive on them.  I too find that incredibly hard to do in BoS, which is a bummer because I would otherwise love flying the Stuka.  Kinda defeats the purpose of flying dive bombers if you have to cruise around at low level in order to see targets.

 

Actually that's quite a bit of an "urban myth" about the Stuka. When attacking moving targets such as tanks Stukas flew at much lower altitudes (up to 1000m) to enhance the chances of spotting their prey (which was often camouflaged). Medium/High altitude approaches were usually made when the target was static (such as defensive earthworks) or confined to roads or railways. Given the visual limitations we're having to live with in-game low-alt attacks will have to be used more often as tanks or softskinned vehicles will be the target quite often.

[AbortedMan]

Plotting general headings and timing them from your point of origin is the key to any navigation...landmarks are only supplement and confirmation that you're going the right way.

 

If you look on the TWB server there are headings to points if interest (various objectives) printed on the map with a dotted line pointing to and from bases and navigational landmarks. You can use these principles with any map that doesn't have the extra information as well.

[IRRE_Chaps]

It is just necessary to prepare its mission before and to note course, the times of flight between waypoints. When we know at any time where we are approximately it is easier to spot on the map.
Otherwise there is a Ruler(https://457bea087c33d16c46f2d007748dab4b84725851.googledrive.com/host/0BwbLWsLToYhdSXI0dlVwc1hzYmc/ )which allows to show the map on another screen or on tablet

Edited April 6, 2015 by LAL_Chaps

[1./JG42Nephris]

BlitzPig, actally it is quiet easy to navigate and find given targets from your airfield, ... by everyone who is able to take off.

It just means some kind of plan and maybe fourth class calculation.

You got your target, your course , distance and avg speed ( tas/ias) which leads to a avg flying time to reach your target.

For returning home you either do same or use radio.

 

 

Btw i am pretty sure there is an app to do the calculations by sliders.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

 

 

Within minutes I was totally lost. Honestly, I just cannot navigate on that featureless, colorless, vast expanse. I took 100% fuel so I thought I would just keep searching for a target to bomb. At one point some flak was going off around me, but I could not see where it was coming from, so those Red Army gunners were safe. I flew around for about 45 minutes (I think), at 3000 meters.

 

Blitz, I'm am fairly new to playing on expert/custom servers and do get lost myself but the best 2 servers for me at the moment are "Wings Of liberty" and "Eagles nest"

 

The Wings server shows your aircraft icon on the map which I know isn't very realistic but it doesn't show enemy aircraft unless they are right over your own base. It's a lot of fun to fly on there.

With Nest, it shows various compass headings to different objectives on the map but is more of a challenge to navigate. I have also got a large map on a pad which helps. You may have already flown on these 2 servers but if you haven't maybe we will see you on there at some point and we can both get lost! 

[Quax]

  Honestly, I just cannot navigate on that featureless, colorless, vast expanse. 

 

I find it very easy to navigate, as there are lots of catching features and landmarks .  The map on my kneeboard (iPad) surely helps, but in the meantime I know enough by heart. First thing I do before take off, is checking the ingame time to know the direction of the sun. Then I start my stop watch,

 

Navigation was the main task of any pilot in the pre-gps days as WW2. There have been much more difficult areas to navigate as the Stalingrad map. And if they didn´t make the way back, they were as dead as if they would have been shot down. Without the task of navigation, it is no real simulator.

Edited April 6, 2015 by Quax

[=LD=Stache]

That's what i liked about Hyperlobby when the original IL2 came out;  You met in the lobby, people could advertise their coop missions ,you selected the mission and ended up on the runway as a group (10+pilots) ! with a defenite goal to kill the oppostion(or bombers/ground targets) but because both sides started simultaniously it forced people to work together to survive and win the mission , the present multiplayer setup while catering to the people with really short attention spans, does nothing to promote cooperative flying .

 

You spawn seperatly fly of to fight some 1 on 1 or 1 on 2 duel ,get killed rince and repeat...............................pretty boring.

 

We need something like hyperlobby to get some squadbased action going and upping the numbers cap on the MP servers could help tremendously with that. (imagine a sever with 100+ people in fighting an ongoing battle for a whole day or a week with moving frontlines ect.........epic)

 

Just my 0.02$

[312_Tygr]

I'm a sucker for RL-type experience. Therefore my ideal MP experience would look like this:

 

- log on to a server, choose side.

 

- chose a fighter or a bomber unit - get info about the unit's a/c type/strength/resupply status/roster, current base, speciality (fighter/fighter-bomber/attacker/dive bomber/level bomber)

 

- choose a mission from a menu for that unit, get a briefing.

 

- wait for the mission roster to fill. get on TS with others in the flight meanwhile

 

- fly the mission

 

- get debriefed

 

Whatever the opposite side does should be a mystery to me - how many people are on the other side, where are they, what planes they're flying, all that should be completely non-transparent. Radars around the bases should be replaced by radio calls from ground control/observers. No GPS, of course. There should be no indication on the screen of what you've destroyed or not until the debriefing. Also, there should be no messages about who shot who etc... that kind of intel wasn't available to pilots in real time anyway. 

 

You can do a lot of what I'm proposing with the current system or with server settings, but you need to plan and organize outside of the game. If it was available inside the game, it would be awesome.

[AndyHill]

Within minutes I was totally lost.   Honestly, I just cannot navigate on that featureless, colorless, vast expanse.  I took 100% fuel so I thought I would just keep searching for a target to bomb.

At one point some flak was going off around me, but I could not see where it was coming from, so those Red Army gunners were safe.

I flew around for about 45 minutes (I think), at 3000 meters.

 

 

I'm not saying the in-game tools are perfect, but luckily there's a solution to your specific problem. LAL_Chaps seems to already have posted this, but the Ruler tool really does help: https://457bea087c33d16c46f2d007748dab4b84725851.googledrive.com/host/0BwbLWsLToYhdSXI0dlVwc1hzYmc/

 

I was completely hopeless at finding anything until I started estimating flight times with the above mentioned tool. Just click the waypoints you want to fly with the "Add waypoints" tool and set the estimated flight speed, write down headings and times and you WILL find yourself at approximately correct locations. At least usually close enough to find whatever you were looking for. If you have a tablet or an extra monitor, even better. I really suggest you try the tool, it will help a lot and we don't know at all when and if the in-game tools are going to improve.

[BraveSirRobin]

Speaking of navigation, I'm very disappointed that the devs did not model the smart phone/tablet mount that all of these aircraft must have had.

[Bearcat]

The problem is deeper imho.

Is lacking a breakthrough sim.

Il2 1946 is aged and has little new to offer after being player 14 years.

Clod was conceived to be the breakthrough sim, but failed for excessive ambition. Without commercial support development is too slow to keep interest high constantly and increase players base. Another limit is that community is centered around just 2 servers, both full real. There is no way for beginners or occasional players to find alternative and increase players base.

Bos was conceived as a compromise sim. No offence in this. I mean it was a sort of reaction to Clod mistakes. Not a sim able to outperform the others and to set totally new standards, but a stable product with up to date features. Given this, a large part of the community hasn't fallen in love with it. If this sim will be able to surpass the others everywhere (expecially in handling large formations and mass of objects and players), taking advantage of the fact that competing sims cannot develop at the same speed, situation may improve. This depends a lot on the limits of the engine.

 

If we look at forums discussions, there is a lot of debate (and rivality) about which one is better.

I do not remember these kind of debates with Il2. Much of the debate was to improve the sim itself pushing it towards new standard.

 

That is because the people who preferred say CFS3, or FA, Warbirds or AH.. and there were quite a few who did... did not spend their time flooding the UBI forum with their dissatisfaction with IL2..

 

They spent their time flying their sim of choice...

 

There were a lot of folks, particularly in the CFS crowd, even before CFS3 was released, who were satisfied with what they had, had no desire to check out that new Pacific theater add on for IL2 ... and they made no bones about it..

 

 

This isn't directed at you (I agree with what you said) but this community is so self destructive it is beyond belief. Look at the number of venomous posts there are...you would think there is a large number of people who want to see IL2 fail. It was just teh same with 1C & MG in CLOD until they went belly up and now CLOD is lauded as the second coming. TF might be doing a good job but it can not compare to a well financed company which has the resources to pump cash in to it's project. It will be the same for IL2 if it is killed off by the same people.

 

There's a whole bunch of stuff I would like to see changed, I am vocal about some of them and pragmatic about others but more importantly I am spending my time flying and enjoying the sim. I wasted enough years waiting for patches in IL2 Forgotten Battles (everyone forgets ab out some of the horror stories of that sim), then waiting for CLOD/SOW to be released and then waiting for fixes etc. IL2-BOS reminds me of the old days, it is better than 1946 and CLOD imho because it gives me that feeling which CLOD didn't.

 

If we get online and fly and make freinds more people will join....if we just slag the whole thing off and pick holes in it then it will become more and more obscure. I am convinced there are many people who want the latter.

 

Cheers

 

Emil

 

Don't like it? Don't play it. My steam Library is full of games I didn't like but I don't waste my time complaining about it on their forums...I've got better things to do.

 

Yes I am one of the original JG5. We have 5 of our squad flying BOS which is a lot more than it was before BOS was released. We like it, it has the old IL2 feel (before Forgotten Battles) and we would like to see it succeed and get better. I have hundreds of hours on CLOD, I don't particularly like it anymore but you wont see me bashing it on their forums.

 

I think constructive criticism is a good thing but there are plenty of people who seem to be looking to find fault with it regardless, there was loads of hate towards 777 on SimHQ and the ATAG forums even before this sim was released so yeh there are people who want to see this fail. The MP scene isn't dead there is as many or more people online as there are in CLOD, and more than on 1946. We could get co-ops running with not too much work it just takes some effort making them, people could be running the BOS launcher in the back ground to improve that community feel (like HL did) and people could join a server and get on coms rather than do the T&B low level dweeb flying around airfields.

 

AT the end of the day I hope they make the changes we need, get rid of the unlocks online, increase the cap on servers, give us a hand with co-ops and make a dynamic campaign...I think they want to but are probably constrained by keeping their business going. 

 

Good posts.... particularly the highlighted parts but pretty much the entire post.

 

I never said I hate the game. It's just that there's no actual game for me to play. The models are nice, the map's fine, the weather looks great. And that's it. No actual gameplay. (Apart from a QMB masquerading as a campaign)

I hope it doesn't fail. I never wished it would fail.

If the developers would have actually listened to people like me it would be succeeding rather than floundering now.

Instead we're all supposed to wait until the mission building and server hosting community rescues the game whilst the developers build their next masterpiece.

Hopefully in a year or two the game will have improved due to community campaigns etc and then I can rebuy it (and any expansions) when it's on a Steam sale.

 

That next masterpiece... is a continuation of the initial sim though. Not an abandonment and moving on from the initial product. This is is an ongoing piece of work.. and it just amazes me that even given the level of improvement on this sim from day one of release to now which is what.. all of 6 months in...? I am amazed that there are still folks who see this as more half empty.. than half full given that the glass is still under the tap.... and the water is still running. 

 

I get you capt stubing but do you know we had big servers already back in september 2014? I counted sth like 80 players on the most populated server one day back than if I rememeber correctly and 70 wasn't a rare sight during weekends either.

Now compare that with the frcation of players you see actively flying online nowdays...

Making missions more interesting with new content isn't the primary issue, the lack of players nessecary to even enjoy current content is.

 

I wonder how many folks were turned off from even buying this sim based on information they gleaned from other places.. after all the overall scuttlebutt from some circles was that you couldn't trust the opinions on the sim from here.. because they were biased.. what with all the alleged biased moderation and locking down of any dissent on these boards.. ....

 

Look... this sim is a work in progress.. and it does everything that it does better than it did 6 months ago.. It still may not be to everyone's liking.. yet.. but what in Sam Hill do people expect this team to do? Run their business by committee? It is obvious that they have a plan... and because some don't see everything that they want right off the bat they want to run for the hills or spend much of their waking moments complaining about what BoS lacks rather than taking in what it does have... and there is no excuse for the way so much of this discussion has gotten so personal.. Meaning the overall discussion over the past 6-12 months .. not this particular one.. This one has been pretty civil actually... Thank you very much...

[SCG_Neun]

I could be way off base here...I'm old and tend to reflect back to the glory days of online combat....But.....I see organized virtual squadrons....why can't these squads interact with one another to setup prescribed combat times and scenarios? Don't get me wrong...I know some do....but perhaps this game is designed for that style of online play......I have satellite and can't fly online anymore....but is everything...just spawn....and respawn...24/7?  Are there times setup, with set mission goals and objectives where squad members log on and take off together...in closed servers?

 

Could it be that todays hectic schedules and lack of time....prevents anything structured like this at least to the high level of participation there once was....  Most people just want to come online...spawn, get a kill, or get killed fly around and log off....and then watch some TV, or take the kids to a soccer match, or a movie, or clean the house......and a million other things.  I mean...could this be an evolving trend based on lifestyles and how we allot time these days?  Commitment to a fixed time...across the board is down....compared to a few years ago.  People like to be flexible and free...without obligations.  Should we blame the games for that?   Perhaps comparing large numbers of online MP players is not indicative of how successful this game is, or isn't...or at least maybe we should not put as much credence in these figures as we do.... 

Edited April 6, 2015 by JagdNeun

[AbortedMan]

I'm a sucker for RL-type experience. Therefore my ideal MP experience would look like this:

 

- log on to a server, choose side.

 

- chose a fighter or a bomber unit - get info about the unit's a/c type/strength/resupply status/roster, current base, speciality (fighter/fighter-bomber/attacker/dive bomber/level bomber)

 

- choose a mission from a menu for that unit, get a briefing.

 

- wait for the mission roster to fill. get on TS with others in the flight meanwhile

 

- fly the mission

 

- get debriefed

 

Whatever the opposite side does should be a mystery to me - how many people are on the other side, where are they, what planes they're flying, all that should be completely non-transparent. Radars around the bases should be replaced by radio calls from ground control/observers. No GPS, of course. There should be no indication on the screen of what you've destroyed or not until the debriefing. Also, there should be no messages about who shot who etc... that kind of intel wasn't available to pilots in real time anyway. 

 

You can do a lot of what I'm proposing with the current system or with server settings, but you need to plan and organize outside of the game. If it was available inside the game, it would be awesome.

Everything you just described is performed nightly by the regulars and brand new players/1st-timers in The Eagle's Nest server (aside from radars around airfields...those are forced, but the airfields have been moved away from the objectives to negate their efficacy.). There's always at least 6 guys in TeamSpeak using comms and command-structured organization for their flights during the evening. Usually we set out to do a 4-6 man bombing raid on an airfield or objective, but occasionally embark on fighter sweeps.

 

Not directed at you personally, but I'm perplexed at the people describing all current MP experiences as airquake/DF servers when I've made a conscious effort to sculpt the server mission to point everyone towards completing a mission based objective. Us TWB guys are constantly harvesting new people to join the TS server and pair up, group up, or give information on objective based gameplay. I've never seen on the server a lot of the names I see here declaring the non-existence of this stuff, which is annoying to say the least. It seems to me a lot of people are writing this game off based on a tertiary experience they once had on another server...or even worse, another game 20 years ago.

[SCG_Neun]

That's just it AM.....I see great promise for this game, but not in the numbers that were once reflected years ago...or even five years ago for that matter.  The design seems more appropriate for 12 on 12...instead of 45 on 45.....Limited numbers...specific mission objectives, for all those crying out for historical non quake like, non vulching spawn area...game play.  But alas...if take off is precisely at 9PM....these days...many will say...I'll try to make it, but I cant promise....Is that the games fault?

[Leaf]

Everything you just described is performed nightly by the regulars and brand new players/1st-timers in The Eagle's Nest server (aside from radars around airfields...those are forced, but the airfields have been moved away from the objectives to negate their efficacy.). There's always at least 6 guys in TeamSpeak using comms and command-structured organization for their flights during the evening. Usually we set out to do a 4-6 man bombing raid on an airfield or objective, but occasionally embark on fighter sweeps.

 

Not directed at you personally, but I'm perplexed at the people describing all current MP experiences as airquake/DF servers when I've made a conscious effort to sculpt the server mission to point everyone towards completing a mission based objective. Us TWB guys are constantly harvesting new people to join the TS server and pair up, group up, or give information on objective based gameplay. I've never seen on the server a lot of the names I see here declaring the non-existence of this stuff, which is annoying to say the least. It seems to me a lot of people are writing this game off based on a tertiary experience they once had on another server...or even worse, another game 20 years ago.

 

When you say teamspeak, which one is it? Cause for the past week I've been flying nightly (10PM to 1AM GMT) and there are very few, bar my friends, on the official TS.

[KoN_]

I have asked several times for the mini map Tobe implemented into expert servers , however i was told this is not possible .   Really cant figure that out , how on earth are your supposed to navigate with out a knee map . yes i know we have the full screen map that stays open and your plane still continues to fly with your heavy hand on the stick .

And while your trying to figure out where you are ......??      you get attacked with out any hit sounds saying that your under ATTACK .... :mellow:

So by the time you close your full screen map your aircraft is burning and full of holes ...Shall i laugh or cry ..!!!!

 

You then radio the airfields tower asking for the direction to home base ,and that you may need assistance.....  but you get no reply .  ...... :o:

Edited April 6, 2015 by II./JG77_Con

[Dakpilot]

Am sure plenty of real pilots were bounced on the Eastern front with their heads buried in a map figuring out where they were....

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[KoN_]

@Dakpilot

 

yes you are probably right , but there is no need for a full screen map , would you put up a full map while driving your car on the free way . i am talking common sense here .

[AbortedMan]

That's just it AM.....I see great promise for this game, but not in the numbers that were once reflected years ago...or even five years ago for that matter.  The design seems more appropriate for 12 on 12...instead of 45 on 45.....Limited numbers...specific mission objectives, for all those crying out for historical non quake like, non vulching spawn area...game play.  But alas...if take off is precisely at 9PM....these days...many will say...I'll try to make it, but I cant promise....Is that the games fault?

I think interest in this game waning is a result of a couple things...developer interaction with the community, game price, unlocks, other "rival" sim communities (stupid concept, but no other way to put it), and people on this very forum not knowing what they're talking about declaring "X sucks/is broken/can't do this or that (because they haven't tried)".

 

The interest for combat flight games is definitely in the market, a la War Thunder, and that is really the only game dominating the [financial] CFS market right now...so the iron is hot for striking...we just need someone to hit the mark while squashing all the assumptions and rumors. Also, another thing that is killing this game is the unwillingness to facilitate exposure to community made solutions for features the developers cannot implement. Any thread not related to bitching about FMs, DMs, or the price of the game is moved by mods to the dark unexplored reaches of this forum. That's absolutely killing the interest and natural community driven growth of this project.

 

When you say teamspeak, which one is it? Cause for the past week I've been flying nightly (10PM to 1AM GMT) and there are very few, bar my friends, on the official TS.

10pm GMT is 3pm Pacific...which is about an hour before all the primetime action really starts, but the TeamSpeak the TWB guys use while on The Eagle's Nest is ts3.thewetbandits.org. It's also printed on the in-game map if you join The Eagle's Nest.

 

Also, if you see only ~4-5 players on the server, join it and go eat dinner or have a smoke break. People gravitate towards numbers when looking at the server list, but it takes that first little group of people to "seed" the server for them to want to join. After it reaches about 8 players people start piling in and it shoots up to 20-25 even on weekdays. 

@Dakpilot

 

yes you are probably right , but there is no need for a full screen map , would you put up a full map while driving your car on the free way . i am talking common sense here .

Use auto-level or trim your aircraft for level flight if you're having issues flying while navigating. Also...use common sense and don't look at the map for extended periods of time. If you're getting shot down while looking at the map then you weren't paying attention in the first place and would have gotten shot down anyway; Aircraft are visible from 6km away at least so you would have had plenty of time to spot him if you were only looking at your map for a reasonable amount of time. Closure rate for these aircraft upon spotting is like 30 seconds if traveling head-on. That's plenty of time to spot and react while checking map for about 10-15 seconds.

[SCG_Neun]

Yes...I agree AM.....

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

lol I can only laugh at this thread as it seems even Facts are now subjective. ROFL! and not real.

[AvengerSeawolf]

Problem with that is that (based on the research I've done before) the normal/typical altitude to start a bomb run in the Stuka was about 3,000m - so you should be able to fly at that height, see your targets and dive on them.  I too find that incredibly hard to do in BoS, which is a bummer because I would otherwise love flying the Stuka.  Kinda defeats the purpose of flying dive bombers if you have to cruise around at low level in order to see targets.

 

  I know what you mean and I agree to that , I have sucsessfully divebombed from 1700M altitude, yet again you have to know where the target is. The only solution to the problem is to  have marked targets or more easy to see.

 Or fly low to identify and then  spiral climb to bomb

[AbortedMan]

I find it funny that people are complaining about problems and situations the actual pilots flying these aircraft had to deal with in a sim about those pilots and same aircraft.

[HeavyCavalrySgt]

Problem with that is that (based on the research I've done before) the normal/typical altitude to start a bomb run in the Stuka was about 3,000m - so you should be able to fly at that height, see your targets and dive on them.  I too find that incredibly hard to do in BoS, which is a bummer because I would otherwise love flying the Stuka.  Kinda defeats the purpose of flying dive bombers if you have to cruise around at low level in order to see targets.

 

 

This game has taught me a new appreciation for the tactical air to ground guys in WW2.  

 

Spotting an airfield or a ship at sea would have been relatively easy, but spotting a tank?  When I was trying to practice bombing the other day I kept lining up on trees rather than gun emplacements, and usually by the time I spotted my target it was too late to attack it.

 

Bombing is clearly not my forte!

Edited April 6, 2015 by HeavyCavalrySgt

[von_Tom]

A lot of folks are missing the point.

 

Numbers are low because numbers of people playing combat sims are low, that's all. If BOS had been out in the mid '90s you'd have had 100s on every night. The people who are online during the week are those that are left. I'd bet that most who left went because CLOD wasn't the second coming.

 

As it is, CLOD can be good fun but the theatre is boring now. If TF5 sees the light of day it'll be interesting for a short while before flying over sand in perfect weather starts to pall. The functionality of CLOD is amazing but it is purely a PvP game with many limitations. That said, SOW and ACG do wonders with it.

 

BOS is the same but it seems it is more useable. For example last night I flew in a test mission with 15 or so others versus AI. 132 flak guns and 170 AI aircraft. Sure they had triggers to spawn in as and when needed but still good numbers. Plus you have ground attack on both sides and weather and stuff like that.

 

But regardless of the merits of any game out there, there still won't be the numbers of people who are going to fly so as to take us back to the glory days of 999 on HL. THAT is the lesson we all ought to heed.

 

von Tom

[AbortedMan]

There's like a million people playing War Thunder. I don't think the interest for flight games is gone.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

 

 

There's like a million people playing War Thunder. I don't think the interest for flight games is gone

There are many people playing WT but in arcade mode. It's an arcade style game dressing itself up as a simulator. It's fun to a point but its no flight simulator IMHO. It's seems as though a lot of folk want mindless hours of arcade gameplay utilising PTW, forgetting about realism history and pretty much everything else in between.  

[6./ZG26_Custard]

Speaking of navigation, I'm very disappointed that the devs did not model the smart phone/tablet mount that all of these aircraft must have had.

 

Phone/tablet ? What are you talking about you just have to use some imagination and pretend its one of these