What's the current state of affairs

[whatnot]

With complex sims like ROF and COD you're guaranteed to have a plenty of fantastic jaw dropping features / aspects of the game and a fistful of recurring requests  / forum explosions to fix or improve some other things.

 

With COD I enjoyed:

• Gorgeous Clickable Cockpits
• Detailed planes and damage models
• Customizable mission builder
• Ability to render large number of planes if you had a mid-high end rig
• Fairly large maps.

 

The constant complaints were often about:

• Issues with AI radio commands
• AI that often flies F-16's trying to evade your bullets
• Issues with some planes performance envelopes (plane X should fly Y mph at 22000 feet  with octane Z fuel)
• No SDK
• SLI / Anti Aliasing issues

As I haven't had ROF experience I'd like to know a similar 50:50 list from ROF veterans' point of view.

 

And thanks in advance for not making this a flame thread but an educational one to bring ppl not too familiar with ROF on the map.

[4pg_inferno]

....NO.... again....

Did you read existing posts before you started a new thread?

Edited December 14, 2012 by realhulu

[whatnot]

Sorry if I missed something crucial, have read a some posts but I guess I've missed the one that introduces the details for ROF engine that I was looking for. Link would be nice and I'll delete this thread if it's a duplicate.

[Krupi]

Sorry if I missed something crucial, have read a some posts but I guess I've missed the one that introduces the details for ROF engine that I was looking for. Link would be nice and I'll delete this thread if it's a duplicate.

We have already being told not to expect cockpits of CODs quality, they take too long apparently... really booted my hopes for BOS down a few notches but we will have to just wait and see hopefully they will be good.

[whatnot]

We have already being told not to expect cockpits of CODs quality, they take too long apparently... really booted my hopes for BOS down a few notches but we will have to just wait and see hopefully they will be good.

 

 

 

Ok, that might then be one to add to the wishlists. What about the areas that are shine with ROF?

Edited December 14, 2012 by whatnot

[Fishbreath]

I'll bite:

 

RoF's positives (for me):

• Great flight models and airplanes with character: the Fokker Dr.I, the Sopwith Camel, and the Gotha.
• Wide range of difficulty options: I started with all the real realism settings on, but had simple gauges and icons for a while while I learned what I was doing in WWI.
• Decent single-player options: dynamic campaign isn't a dynamic campaign exactly, but it's not a scripted campaign, either, and I understand the scripted campaigns that are now available are pretty good.
• Looks very good in motion, especially with HDR (that's personal opinion).
• I've never seen a sim with a better controls mapping system.
• Nearly comprehensive plane set: once the next few early-war scouts go in, pretty much every major scout on the Western Front has been included.

 

RoF's negatives (for me):

• The dynamic campaign mode isn't where I'd call it finished. There's a community-built campaign generator tool that's apparently better, but I haven't tried it yet.
• Limited-size online community. There's the Syndicate for full realism, which is 50-70 players most nights, and New Wings for messing around in dogfights, which is maybe 20-30.
• Limited types of online missions: the Syndicate runs competitive objective-based missions, normally with some ground attack or scouting component, and New Wings is straight dogfight.
• Some probable flight model problems that haven't been fixed in a while (a few aircraft have received FM reviews, but a few more need them still).

[J2_Trupobaw]

As far as I see, it's not a wishlisting thread, but an attempt to introduce each other to games we don't play; nothing wrong with that as long as we stick to positives...


So, things I like in RoF.

-Variety of aircraft and detail of their flight models. They each really are very different beasts in the air and you pretty much need to learn to fly and land most of them separately. Including things like Dr.I that you pilot with rudder and keep in balance with ailerons rather than other way around. I really  feel of quality replacing need of quantity here, of the ~15 craft I own half I still don't know how to fly properly, and feel really profficient with 4-5.

-Level of control - somehow opposite of goregous cockpits and possibility of procedural flight of CloD, the instruments are often minimal and most things are left to pilot's judgement. Including figuring our how to land your plane without breaking your neck, or at least your wings, in times where engineers believed procedures are for pansies and making two craft that land in similar fashion is boring. 

-Simple gauges - on the other hand, while you are learning the plane, you can go softcore and have game display your height, speed, rotations, condition of engine and other things the plane has no gauges for.

-AI using the same flight model as player. It limits number of planes due to required computer power, all right, but there are no AIs flying F16s.

-The weather! The rains and snow and overcast clouds... and the sky over overcast clouds. And the things sun does with these clouds. All from open cockpit.

- Map much larger than effective range of most planes . 

-Career mode. Most people think it's to limited but I have much fun with it.

- My green scarf. Hey, it's a nice touch.

Things I don't like:
- Errorous flight models. Albatros and Pfalz are to slow, Camel is to fast.
- Basic unmoded AI does not do much more than diving and turning.
- Gunners on AI planes are damn snipers, gunners on player planes are lazy bastards that rarely shoot a thing down. At least the first part forces you to think while attacking...
- Gliding to your side of the front with wounded pilot, lower wing missing and breaking engine, then making unpowered landing only to finish on rail tracks and realise a train is coming...

Edited December 14, 2012 by Trupobaw

[whatnot]

Thanks Fish and Trupo for what seems unbiased insight.

 

I assume the online community should grow with moving on to WW2 era as it's the most popular of the two great wars. What kind of limits are we talking about when it comes to max number of planes in the sky? And how does AI vs online players affect the max numbers the engine can support?

 

For me a more limited flyable plane set should be ok as I ended up flying just a few types in COD. I also like the honest and active community dialogue, despite reading some of the "No's" puts a virtual a tear in my eye.

[=IRFC=Jorri]

- Gliding to your side of the front with wounded pilot, lower wing missing and breaking engine, then making unpowered landing only to finish on rail tracks and realise a train is coming...

 

:D :D

 

I will bit as well. I think ROF's stable engine, physics based flight models, excellent GUI, progressive damage modeling and sounds are some of its best merits - and I'm looking forward to enjoying them in a new WWII title. A few downsides are lack of cockpit damage, object limit in missions, and limited limited engine management.

 

Actually, the engine management in ROF is OK, but I would like to see it expanded...something that will of course happen anyway for BoS since WWII planes are more complex.

 

If they then also add cockpit damage and increase the maximum number of objects/AI in missions, they will have come a long with with getting the engine up to scratch.

 

The AI could be improved to make more use of actual tactics and have a more realistic situational awareness, as well - even though from a technological viewpoint, where it makes use of the same flight models as we do and is even capable of flying an actual RC plane, it is very impressive.

Edited December 16, 2012 by hq_Jorri

[whatnot]

Does anyone know what kind of object limits are we talking about? How many planes can you have participating the battle.. 50 planes? 100, 200?

 

If you throw in tanks and AA does that take away from the max plane count?

[=IRFC=Jorri]

Hi whatnot, here is a post from SYN_Vander on the subject, in reply to 5JG27Farber. Vander's squadron hosts one of the biggest servers in RoF:

 

 

 

 

 

I really hope the next engine to promote IL2 is able do now what we do in Cliffs of Dover!

Ive just been and asked a group which has succesfully ran a server in RoF since its release about the current state of the engine. The answers were pretty grim. 75 players, 60-70 ground and if you have fewer players, say 35, you can have 8 - 16 AI aircraft. Apparently its to do with multi-threading and cores.

Currently on clod without dedicated server files on our server (Storm of War) I'd say the confortable max for client performance is more like 90 players, 1200 statics (Some people I know have used 4000) and ground AI, and 50 AI bombers... Anything less simply will not do.

Fingers crossed.

 

This is basically what we are aiming for missions on our MP server. You could go a little higher on number of players and moveable objects, but we prefer to have a solid MP experience. I should also explain that while we may have 60 AI objects defined in a mission, we spawn extra objects during gameplay as well.
Also, with a server that has cores running on a higher frequency then we have, you should be able to push these limits towards a 100.
The number of static objects can be - of course - much, much higher.

I'm looking forward to see what kind of MP changes will be done for BOS!

 

Edited December 16, 2012 by hq_Jorri

[Pudfark]

Thanks for the candor here.  I just bought ROF and I enjoyed the opinions.

Am now off to map my controls and a few circuits around the field.   

[whatnot]

Hi whatnot, here is a post from SYN_Vander on the subject, in reply to 5JG27Farber. Vander's squadron hosts one of the biggest servers in RoF: "Ive just been and asked a group which has succesfully ran a server in RoF since its release about the current state of the engine. The answers were pretty grim. 75 players, 60-70 ground and if you have fewer players, say 35, you can have 8 - 16 AI aircraft. Apparently its to do with multi-threading and cores."

 

Wow, that's a pretty tight limit for a modern flight sim. I know that the team will have their hands full just to do the WW2 content and requirements to the engine, but I hope that multiplayer will be high on their list as I would assume it's one of the biggest complaints from the ppl coming from CloD-sized servers.

 

But I guess it's time for me too to take the ROF I never really played for a quick spin to take a closer look. Thanks again for good insight everyone contributed so far, you don't get this kind of data from a bug thread or a read me.

[Fishbreath]

It's important to note that the limits on static objects are much higher (static objects being things that don't need AI or complicated damage modeling; i.e. buildings, parked airplanes and vehicles). RoF doesn't have static airplanes/vehicles yet, I don't think, but it looks like those are planned features for the engine, and that'll certainly help make Stalingrad feel bigger. That said, I'd still love to see an engine that can support larger use of mobile ground vehicles.

[migmadmarine]

Yes, there have been three promo videos released in the last few weeks for more ground/stationary objects for ROF, so hopefully more progress will be made on that front during the next year.