Stalingrad vs Cliffs of Dover

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

The people who latch on to any and every post that says anything [negative] about this sim and inject ridicule or derision at [snip] the poster, the [thread] [snip] are the ones who are behaving more like trolls. 

 

In my opinion it's a two-way street.

 

There are a couple of Furious Cats and Brave Sirs around here that are especially guilty of this.

Edited June 10, 2015 by 4./JG26_Adler

[BraveSirRobin]

In my opinion it's a two-way street.

 

There are a couple of Furious Cats and Brave Sirs around here that are especially guilty of this.

 

Guilty of defending the game against people who do nothing but trash it?  Yup.  That's me.  And there should be more people who who enjoy the game doing that.  

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

Guilty of defending the game against people who do nothing but trash it?  Yup.  That's me.  And there should be more people who who enjoy the game doing that.  

 

No, guilty of stirring the pot. 

 

You're a grown man and you know the difference.

[Bearcat]

Yes but the difference is that here that is not allowed to continue for long..  Some may call that censorship but I call it keeping the discussion flowing on the sim and not letting the individual pi$$ing contests between members escalate out of hand.. so get a room guys..

[BraveSirRobin]

No, guilty of stirring the pot. 

 

You're a grown man and you know the difference.

 

LOL

 

Physician heal thyself!!

[Bearcat]

... Take it to a PM guys..

[-NW-ChiefRedCloud]

I'll add my useless comment to this discussion. A lot of water both technically and programming wise has flowed under the proverbial bridge since CloD was released in it's Pre-Abandonment condition. With out a doubt the programmers and all who put it together had some very real talent and ideals. Many that were perhaps way ahead of their times and what they had to work with.  I salute you all. BoS, I'm certain has drawn on some of this talent I suspect and has benefited from the good and bad learned from CloD.

 

For some to say that BoS is better is to also say it is newer and better put together. I recall an old game title called "Crimson Sky's" that I loved. Why? Great story and for what it was, I enjoyed trying to fly. Yes planes on a stick. But that was then and this is now. Too often newer doesn't necessarily mean better. But it can. The truth is in the individual preference.  

 

There is a similar thread over in the ATAG forums on War Thunder vs CloD. And as you can well guess there are varying points of view. But over all, it is agreed that anything that helps continue this very small nick of enjoyment, flight simulations, is a good thing and is not to be scuffed at.

 

A difference in people, countries, backgrounds, & beliefs may all contribute to our like and dislikes in our discussions here. For some it's just a good moment to wrestle over an OLD topic. Opinions do matter, but anger over them is not needed.

 

I personally enjoy Il-2 1946, CloD, DCS, BoS, RoF, & when money becomes available, BoM. I've tried WT and do not prefer it personally. So as Doris Day would say ... What Ever Will Be, Will Be ....

 

Chief

[SharpeXB]

I disagree with the 90% part.. In IL2 anyone who went to the forum to ask... "How do I get rid of that annoying text" was immediately directed here. It was relatively common knowledge.

Never forget what a dummy the average user is. When I first used the Quick Single missions in CoD it took a while for me to realize you could fly more than just the one plane on the screen by clicking on it. In BoS when you pull up that same menu it shows you all the planes right away.

Edited June 10, 2015 by SharpeXB

[Chuck_Owl]

Never forget what a dummy the average user is. 

 

That`s me in a nutshell. 

 

"My name is Foarrest. Forrest Gu-ump."

[Sokol1]

 And even with the ini options, the default setting should have been with the people tunrned on, not off. 

 

 

Dont bother with these "human" in CloD, they only have one uniform for all nations and they dont run from strafed vehicles - just became... "casualites of war". 

 

http://imageshack.us/a/img20/130/gxd3.jpg

 

And the guy in bicycle is drunk and have something strange in their mouth: 

 

 

It is...  

[sallee]

Looks pretty realistic. Erk comes back from the Lamb and Flag after a shedfull, all perfectly historic.

[Sokol1]

Those games were made back in the dark ages of PC gaming when these things only sold on floppy discs to computer enthusiasts. It's a new era now. No game today would even think of having major settings hidden away in config files.

 

The Notepad trick: 

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/16707-sound-flak/?do=findComment&comment=264335

[J2_Trupobaw]

I agree with CloD=rails opinion from first posts; the flight physics is where the biggest difference is. Compared to BoS (or RoF for that matter) in CloD I can feel the vectors I'm flying alongside; either I'm going along my projected patch, or going along my projected patch with an orthogonal vector pushing me in direction I should be sliding to, or the latter with some random shaking added to indicate stalls. CloD physics is probably nowhere as simple as I describe, but flying it feels like being pushed by several distinguishable, independently changing forces rather than constantly changing resultant force clearly affected by your mass and inertia. Since I get my kicks from feeling of stick and rudder flight, with scenarios, downing other players  or managing virtual cockpit just means to that end, I find CloD lacking. TF are doing fine job at what they can change, but flight physics engine seems to be out of their control and things they can change are decorations when compared to physics, anyway. From my PoV what TF can do is adding new make-up and jewelry to clumsy old girl, who instead needs to be taught to not behave like a lump of wood when it matters.  

Edited June 11, 2015 by Trupobaw

[SharpeXB]

There's an effect flying CoD where it feels like your plane gets stuck on a certain vector like a rut in a road, usually right when I'm trying to aim at something. It's not smooth or realistic in feel.

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

There's an effect flying CoD where it feels like your plane gets stuck on a certain vector like a rut in a road, usually right when I'm trying to aim at something. It's not smooth or realistic in feel.

 

I don't get that at all so I'm not entirely sure where you're coming from with that.

 

You're not playing with the unofficial TF patches so I also don't think you're a great authority for how the game plays for the majority of its users.

[Mysticpuma]

Okay, for the neutrals out there for the BoS fans, for the CloD fans the simple answer is;

 

Stalingrad vs Cliffs of Dover? There is no comparison

[Dakpilot]

I think BoS is a bit colder....

 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[6./ZG26_Emil]

I think BoS is a bit colder....

 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

and less flying on rails too :D

[6./ZG26_Emil]

what about the 190 tactics, run forrest run

 

It's not 'Run Forrest Run' it's 'Fly Through Forrest Gump' :D

[3instein]

and less flying on rails too :D

BoS has less of everything too. :D

 

Mick.

[FuriousMeow]

BoS has less of everything too. :D

 

Mick.

 

Not at all.

[Trident_109]

It's not 'Run Forrest Run' it's 'Fly Through Forrest Gump' :D

I see what you did there.

[Feathered_IV]

I've been finding that the BoS feeling of flight feels less like a streamlined aircraft cutting through a wall of air, and more like an aeroplane shape moving at high speed while balancing on the head of a pin. Are there any recommended stick settings out there to alleviate this?

[ST_ami7b5]

FFB helps a lot.

[Finkeren]

I've been finding that the BoS feeling of flight feels less like a streamlined aircraft cutting through a wall of air, and more like an aeroplane shape moving at high speed while balancing on the head of a pin. Are there any recommended stick settings out there to alleviate this?

Curves always helps with a sense of over-sensitivity.

 

Personally I love the sense of 'balancing' the aircraft. It was part of what made the FM in RoF feel so great and has translated well (but still feels very different) into BoS.

[Urra]

I've been finding that the BoS feeling of flight feels less like a streamlined aircraft cutting through a wall of air, and more like an aeroplane shape moving at high speed while balancing on the head of a pin. Are there any recommended stick settings out there to alleviate this?

The only thing that helped me with this a stiffer spring.

[ST_ami7b5]

The FFB works nice in BoS - the faster you fly the stiffer the stick goes.

[SharpeXB]

I find a stiff spring makes a sensitive plane worse. I don't find BoS or CoD either difficult to handle though.

[Lusekofte]

I find COD more challenging, you need to know to be able to keep your engine running and bomb a target. You fly on rails with bomber in this game. While things are a bit more authentic in cod. The light feel to the planes in BOS and the fact that 90 % of the players is not capable to taxi to runway for takeoff tells me that the average player in cod take things a bit more realistic than the average in BOS.

I like BOS, dont get me wrong, but the fact that full realism servers with no GPS and alert of attacks are empty, and only gps servers are populated make this a no brainer. Online cod is the only option

[6./ZG26_Emil]

taking off in clod is easier but both are pretty easy 

[SharpeXB]

IMO which is as someone who isn't a real war bird pilot... The ground handling in CoD is way too easy. Compare it to DCS or BoS. Also just watch a third person view of CoD and you can see the planes just sliding along the ground with no complexity. It doesn't look real. DCS has the same issue with the it's simple FM planes. You can just see the difference from an exterior view.

 

For comparison to a different sim I have a good Caranado Waco biplane in XPlane 10 and it will punish you for takeoff or landing it wrong just like BoS and DCS.

 

Considering that real pilots were killed a lot flying these planes. If you haven't killed yourself in the game it's probably too easy. And I don't think I've killed myself landing or taking off in CoD.

 

Here's a great quote from Erich Hartmann.

 

"We were so outnumbered that the new pilots did not have a chance. They were being sent to die, and nothing was coming as a benefit. The 109 was not an easy fighter to fly anyway; just taking off was a trick, because of the propeller torque. Many of these young guys ground looped by not being very familiar with the aircraft. If you gave too much throttle, the fighter would swing ninety degrees on takeoff unless you gave full hard rudder. Landing caused a lot of problems, as the undercarriage was very narrow. Coming in too fast, not reducing power, or giving full flaps caused many to flip over on their backs. Also, the 109 would stall quickly if you reduced power too quickly. These were just the nature of the beast, so to speak. It was not like the 190, which had a wide undercarriage and was more ruggedly built for field operations. Hrabak held the record for ground loops in the 109, I think, but do not tell him I said that! It was very easy to do on a muddy field or unimproved runway. We hardly ever flew from a hard surface, until much later in the war. Then we began cracking up the fighters. We were used to landing on soft earth, and those habits saw a few pilots bend their gear, so to speak."

Edited June 30, 2015 by SharpeXB

[Lusekofte]

I disagree, you cannot compare BOS or any CFS game with the real thing. The takeoff and landing in BOS are fairly easy if you know the parameters . Those numbers do not equal the real thing. In Norway more planes was lost among 109 in Take offs and Landing than in fighting.  So it is not news. I find DCS more realistic when it comes to take offs. But of course I cannot afford a real 109 to compare with.

What I tried to say was, based on the users , missions and game itself. I feel I have accomplished more by surviving a mission in COD than by doing the same in BOS. I wish for a wider specter of simmers online, I wish for a full realism server filled with people wanting to experience the real thing, the feeling of being there. If I some day experience that I might change my opinion. Because in cod you do, you got Thursdays event on SOW server and the same at Sundays. Bomber night at ATAG server. Priceless 

[SharpeXB]

I feel I have accomplished more by surviving a mission in COD than by doing the same in BOS.

 

How so? The aircraft of both games feature realistic systems. The ability in Cliffs to simply click on the same controls in the cockpit doesn't necessarily make it more realistic. I do like playing CoD + Deastersoft with its "Dead is Dead" mode. Now that's a feeling of accomplishment for certain. But that's a campaign feature. The thing that spoils even those great campaigns though is CoDs astonishingly poor AI.

[Felix58]

... CoDs astonishingly poor AI.

+1

Obviously Team Fusion are not able to fix this.  I would have thought it would have been priority number one, especially if squads want to run COOPs.  How come the CLoDsters are not whining about this?  Reduces CLoD to a multiplayer game only.  From memory, the mission editor is not worth a crumpet either.    

[Ace_Pilto]

Well, I guess this was bound to end up being a troll thread due to the title but to go back to the original issue of head movement...

 

I would say that BoS handles it a lot better, In CloD I feel like I have a pygmy sized head and that the cockpit is the size of a tennis court. I've sat in a Spitfire and it was a tight fit, it would be hard to look around behind you. There is not much room in there for a guy who is 5'11. If you factor in the fact that I would have been sitting on a parachute and wearing a helmet, if I was in there as more than a tourist, then there wouldn't have been much clearance when the canopy rail closed overhead. That's why they gave the canopy that distinctive bulge (and the small 'blister') which would have been a very advanced and complicated piece of engineering at the time. (If you look at the prototype Spitfire you can see that the canopy is more or less flush compared to operational variants.) BoS is more convincing in portraying this feeling of restricted motion, you can't move your head around as much and you might notice "G" forces pushing you into your seat and making it hard to see the gunsight properly. It's probably a little too generous still but I find it to be more convincing.

 

As far as comparing it to the amount your head moves in real life during flight I can only say that you just don't get the same sensation from a computer screen. I remember doing steep turns for the first time as a passenger and my natural tendency was to keep my head level with the horizon, it took conscious effort for me to overcome this at first and stay relaxed. Apart from that your head is always stable since your body anticipates what you are going to do with the controls. 

 

Things could be different with oculus rift since it should be possible to calibrate one to represent 1:1 scale motion and I am guessing that there will be a lot of vomit and sore necks in the community if that happens.

 

As far as gunnery. BoS feels more convincing by a country mile to me because, If you do severe damage to an aircraft under high G load it folds up and tears itself apart like you would expect but if you're thumping shells into a bomber or a fighter flying straight it absorbs them unless you hit a sweet spot or fly nice and balanced and hammer one small area. Cliffs lacks the level of polish in this respect but the gunnery is competently modeled.

 

Both games have far too many tracers in the belting, making gunnery vastly easier than it should be. In this respect Cliffs is more generous in that you can change your belting to whatever you want.

Edited July 1, 2015 by JimmyBlonde

[SharpeXB]

+1

Obviously Team Fusion are not able to fix this. I would have thought it would have been priority number one, especially if squads want to run COOPs. How come the CLoDsters are not whining about this? Reduces CLoD to a multiplayer game only. From memory, the mission editor is not worth a crumpet either.

The AI is a bummer for sure. But my best feeling of flight sim accomplishment had not to do with AI. In a CoD Desastersoft night time mission running low on fuel and having to navigate back to base on full real settings with that screwey compass in the Hurricane and succeeding. Knowing you can't just esc in Desastersoft is a great thrill. I also like how CoD models chute failures so you aren't so eager to chicken out. I had to gauge my fuel and balance a night time jump vs not running out of gas on the final approach. It was awesome :-D

[FuriousMeow]

In my opinion it's a two-way street.

 

There are a couple of Furious Cats and Brave Sirs around here that are especially guilty of this.

 

Guilty of barely posting? Guilty of pointing out the ridiculousness that surrounds "how great CloD is and how terrible BoS is" when CloD was terrible at release and requires hacking to be playable but for some reason people keep posting about CloD on a BoS forum and I reply in less than a fraction of them?

 

It's a two way street, except I only stay on this side of the street and certain folks come onto this side to bring their baggage while I stay here and don't antagonize or do anything other than respond to those that spout vitriol.

 

So, two way street for you - but I'm just staying on my side. I don't make threads about how terrible CloD is, now do I? I don't go to the CloD forums to brag about BoS or denigrate CloD. Don't drag me into this, it's not my fault CloD fans require so much hate towards BoS. It's not my fault you can't enjoy your hacked game without crapping on BoS. I don't hunt down CloD threads, why are there even CloD threads here? Go play that hacked game, I'm not the only one who knows it's just 1946 with a barely functioning graphics engine that can't even support two cores properly and not even 4. They had to move certain processes to the second CPU core, because it was designed for single core CPUs. That's how advanced your wonderful game is. Tree was right, CloD is all that he said it would be.

Edited July 1, 2015 by FuriousMeow

[Cybermat47]

Guilty of barely posting? Guilty of pointing out the ridiculousness that surrounds "how great CloD is and how terrible BoS is" when CloD was terrible at release and requires hacking to be playable but for some reason people keep posting about CloD on a BoS forum and I reply in less than a fraction of them?

 

It's a two way street, except I only stay on this side of the street and certain folks come onto this side to bring their baggage while I stay here and don't antagonize or do anything other than respond to those that spout vitriol.

 

So, two way street for you - but I'm just staying on my side. I don't make threads about how terrible CloD is, now do I? I don't go to the CloD forums to brag about BoS or denigrate CloD. Don't drag me into this, it's not my fault CloD fans require so much hate towards BoS. It's not my fault you can't enjoy your hacked game without crapping on BoS. I don't hunt down CloD threads, why are there even CloD threads here? Go play that hacked game, I'm not the only one who knows it's just 1946 with a barely functioning graphics engine that can't even support two cores properly and not even 4. They had to move certain processes to the second CPU core, because it was designed for single core CPUs. That's how advanced your wonderful game is. Tree was right, CloD is all that he said it would be.

1) It's not hacked, it's modded. Hacking implies a malicous intent.

 

2) You haven't made threads bashing CloD, but the post you just made certainly craps on it.

 

3) The reason people make CloD threads on this forum is because there's a section of the forum that allows it. It's the same reason people post about BoS on ATAG, and upload user guides for BoS there.

 

4) They're video games. Get over it.

[LukeFF]

 

 

It's not hacked, it's modded. Hacking implies a malicious intent.

 

 

Hacking is used all the time to refer to "code adjustments" that are not malicious in any sense of the word. 

[I/JG2_Saladin]

Hello virtual pilots

 

Its my first port on this topic and hope it will not be the last...

 

I started WW II sim with Microsoft CFS 1998 and flown on every WWII sim since that date (CFS 2, CFS3, IL Sturmovik 1946, ROF, BOS, DCS World Warbirds)

 

I spend lot of my free time reading and searching about Warbirds history. My opinion is BOS and CLOD are not made by the same teams and do not target the same public. Of curse CLOD was a huge disappointing at release and the eviction of the Clod team (Luthier) was justified by this failure. But if you spend some time flying and making missions withe FMB in Clod you can't avoid the fact that it is huge ambitious project witch never come to an end. 

 

BOS in my opinion is a much more modest project but realized well  and in a very short time with a good business model and nice marketing.

 

So in conclusion : I fly BOS for Fun and sensations but if i want accurate fly models, ballistics and damage models in click-able photo-realist cockpits on a map looking like real who burns my graphic card...lol i fly Clod and support the amount of bugs steel not solved by TF.

 

to be continued...

 

A little video of this good old IL2 1946 how give me hours and hours of grate pleasure. Thank you mister OLEG MADOX