Excited, but at the same time disappointed

[BSS_Vidar]

My first post in here so I'll be straight to the point. I love the graphics and special FX this sim offers. But the Flight Model just drives me crazy and does nothing to pull me away from flying the Mustang in DCS as it makes it massive improvements and offers for the Late WWII European sim... and now the announcement of the F-4U Corsair and Iwo Jima map/campaign. The pitch and yaw responses are just way to sloppy about their respective axis. I've tried every curve and dead zone configure I can muster to deaden the sloppiness, but to no avail.

 

I have dumped a lot of my money into this program, and really took a dis-liking to the responses that came with the P-40 - really turned me off. I recently flew the MiG-3 and was presently surprised with its handling. Until this stability issue is corrected, I'm not spending another dime in IL2. 30+ other Blacksheep members are in the same mind-set. That's why you rarely see us on these servers. The word in this community is there have no interest in Pacific Theater being part of the future here. Another reason the guys don't want to waist their coin here.

 

I hope axis stability issues that resemble Rise of Flight flight model characteristics are improved here, because there are some GREAT WWII prospects in DCS World on the near horizon that will attract my hard earned money.

 

S!

 

V

[BraveSirRobin]

Vidar, we really miss your constant complaining about the RoF flight models.  Ok, mostly I just miss shooting you down.

[LukeFF]

Geez, I guess Loft was just kidding when he said that they'd love to model the Pacific one day.

[Feathered_IV]

I always wondered what BSS stood for.  Never thought it was Blacksheep.

[7.GShAP/Silas]

Did even a single Japanese aircraft oppose the Americans at the landings on Iwo Jima?  What a funny choice.

[Finkeren]

Did even a single Japanese aircraft oppose the Americans at the landings on Iwo Jima?  What a funny choice.

 

If by "oppose" you mean "try to crash into the US ships", sure. In terms of an actual air battle however, there really isn't much to say about Ivo Jima. There were one or two squadrons of Zekes stationed there, but they were wiped out in the first couple of missions.

 

I don't get, why they chose that either, other than the fact, that it's an easy, small map to make and quite well documented for the period. 

[Guest deleted@50488]

To the OP,

 

I can understand your feel, and I really never read any message from you so I can't say your intentions are those of trolling... I don't think so - I really believe that, just like me sometimes you feel there is something wrong about the pitch response in IL-2 BoS FDM, BUT!

 

Being also a DCS user, and being DCS and BoS / BoM the only sims I presently use, with BoS / BoM occupying 80% of my simming time, all I can say is that one really has to understand that both sims have extraordinary flight dynamics and overall physics modeling, they both model feature of their aircraft modules ( with BoS BoM certainly winning hands down given the amount of high quality aircraft one get's fro the price...) that are very well done, with some being probably enhanced in DCS, while others in BoS / BoM.

 

You mentioned the P40E, and indeed the real counterpart was nothing you can compare to the p51d regarding for instance directional stability - it was well known to be unstable directionally, and that's why the later models tried to overcome those characteristics.

 

I fly the Bf109 K4 in DCS and the closest in BoS ( the G2 )... The K4 in DCS feels loose on ground, not as tail heavy as it should, and still presents to me a problem with pitch trim settings. Inflight there is also a feel of lightness and instability in yaw at higher AoAs that I really don't find plausible, for a late war version of the 109 - the G2 in BoS OTOH being a true charm to fly, and, just as I read from real World pilot's the pilot feels one and only with the aircraft in it's hands / feet... The problem in the BoS G2 is ** only ** that given the way control inputs are modeled one has to pay attention to stick inputs in pitch and somehow drive the control to neutral without abrupt movements, and the slats deployment, which can happen asymmetrically just like in DCS, can also contribute to some wobbling, which is probably realistic too...

 

We do not have a K4, D9 or P51d in BoS, so, I think we can't really compare the accuracy and feel of the flight dynamics on both sims.

 

As someone who has always strived to keep a single flight simulator of each type ( Silent Wings vs Condorsoaring ), FS9, FSX or P3D3 with 744 vs Aerowinx PS1 or PSX, FS9, FSX, X-Plane vs ELITE Premium for GA, and so on... I also tried to find good reasons to ground one of my two preferred sims Ever - DCS and IL-2 Battle os Stalingrad - but that proved to be an impossible task - they're both on pair and above anything else I have ever tried, and each one with it's strong points, the strongest in DCS being for me the modeling of rotary wing like in no other flight simulation platform I have used, as well as it's P51d, the strongest in IL-2 BoS being a UNIQUE feel of being there, in all aspects of the simulation... 

 

So, I'll keep using and enjoying both for their excellent / unique characteristics, and forgiving what I think are their limitations, waiting for the continuous work both teams are at to solve or fine tune this or that details I don't like so much...

[von_Tom]

 

Interesting first post.

 

Some have the same issues, some don't, so it must obviously be the game. I don't understand what you mean by 'sloppiness' though. Leave the controls untouched and there is no hint of sloppiness as I understand that word.

 

What I really don't get is the "We won't spend our money because there's no Pacific" comment (paraphrased). I reckon if you're a game developer you can develop stuff that is relevant to your interests or to your target audience. I guess in a year or two when the F4U is released you can have 109s being pretend Zeros. If enough developers get on board and the audience is there then you might get a full Pacific environment for DCS but it'll take a long long time.

 

von Tom

[Cybermat47]

But the Flight Model just drives me crazy and does nothing to pull me away from flying the Mustang in DCS as it makes it massive improvements and offers for the Late WWII European sim...

 

I wouldn't call DCS a good late WWII Europe sim. For one thing, the two maps it offers at the moment are set in the modern day, and as for the upcoming Normandy map, it's just going to be the P-51, P-47, Spitfire, and nothing else. 109 Ks and 190 Ds entered service in August 1944, and the Battle of Normandy ended in July. DCS is a great modern-day sim, so much so that I've spent around $50 on modern aircraft, but it does nothing for me as a WWII sim.

[Guest deleted@50488]

I wouldn't call DCS a good late WWII Europe sim. For one thing, the two maps it offers at the moment are set in the modern day, and as for the upcoming Normandy map, it's just going to be the P-51, P-47, Spitfire, and nothing else. 109 Ks and 190 Ds entered service in August 1944, and the Battle of Normandy ended in July. DCS is a great modern-day sim, so much so that I've spent around $50 on modern aircraft, but it does nothing for me as a WWII sim.

 

And, as detailled as it's modules can be, and I acknowledge that, truth is they are in some aspects far from perfect, and in some cases even ridiculously out of sync with reality, like the K4 with it's rocket climb rate....

Edited December 25, 2015 by JCOMM

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

[Edited] the pacific, there is more and better theaters of war than that - glad that devs don't go to this direction.

Edited January 4, 2016 by Bearcat
Language

[4thFG_Cap_D_Gentile]

My first post in here so I'll be straight to the point. I love the graphics and special FX this sim offers. But the Flight Model just drives me crazy and does nothing to pull me away from flying the Mustang in DCS as it makes it massive improvements and offers for the Late WWII European sim... and now the announcement of the F-4U Corsair and Iwo Jima map/campaign. The pitch and yaw responses are just way to sloppy about their respective axis. I've tried every curve and dead zone configure I can muster to deaden the sloppiness, but to no avail.

 

I have dumped a lot of my money into this program, and really took a dis-liking to the responses that came with the P-40 - really turned me off. I recently flew the MiG-3 and was presently surprised with its handling. Until this stability issue is corrected, I'm not spending another dime in IL2. 30+ other Blacksheep members are in the same mind-set. That's why you rarely see us on these servers. The word in this community is there have no interest in Pacific Theater being part of the future here. Another reason the guys don't want to waist their coin here.

 

I hope axis stability issues that resemble Rise of Flight flight model characteristics are improved here, because there are some GREAT WWII prospects in DCS World on the near horizon that will attract my hard earned money.

 

S!

 

V

 

+1

 

 

and now the announcement of the F-4U Corsair and Iwo Jima map/campaign

 

V please link to the announcement would you ?

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

I really don't get the problem people have with the PTO. Definately the one that would require the most work as it would require fleshing out of navies and carrier ops, but other then that, it is definitely not a "boring" theatre.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

I'd say the main reasoning for those who aren't 'pro-PTO' as an immediate successor don't actually have a problem with the theatre, but rather don't like the people who keep nagging that the Eastern Front is boring and that they need to change from it. Eventually I'm sure most theatres will be represented, all in due time.

[Lusekofte]

I find the Pasific theatre rather monotonous , because the interesting part took place before the Corsair entered battle. You can of course make a non historical air battle over Iwo Jima . But mostly the corsair was used un opposed as ground pounders in that campaign. 

DCS is by far the best simulator among the CFS games around, but it offer little to nothing other than the planes, I have heard for years what is planned, but it never seems to happened. 

I agree with some of his points, if you stop putting emotion into a discussion. This game should be based on a more modern gems engine, all tho I love to fly in this game, the FM got several funny things going on, but at the same time give you great feeling, in this game you can feel the lift when bombs are dropped, you can feel the weight reduction. The light feel of the aircraft got its upsides. And yet they manage to let us feel how a heavy aircraft should feel like. The moment you fid out you should have pulled up a second before in a IL 2. 

And what game give the excellent and realistic crash in a tree feeling, you notice the bend of the tree, what a thrill. I personally love flying this sim, but I do not say it is without faults. I think people should stop this polaroid discussion. Like all games it is not perfect, fine you do not like it, then leave it. Saying you are 30 + people not going to fly it because there is not going to be pacific theatre, Sorry mate, They need more than 30 customers to pay for that development

[SCG_Neun]

I'd be interested in the Pacific primarily because of the carrier operations.......I'd really like to experience good graphics...and the immersion that this game has.....on the deck of a carrier......or coming in for that all important landing...low on fuel, while that deck is pitching up and down a bit.  But I hope that's after the Med theatre...and maybe Kursk.....and the Battle of France.......

I really hope the Black Sheep guys reconsider though....or I don't think we can continue here.  I mean, 30 guys....all of one accord.  This is just devastating........  

[Holtzauge]

To the OP:

 

Well the BoS FM certainly has some issues that could be improved and I also prefer the DCS FM right now but don’t forget that BoS has some really nice aspects as well:

 

The DM is way better in BoS than in DCS. There is no comparison. In BoS you can down a plane with just a few rounds, shear of a wing, burn the plane, shoot off control surfaces, cause the engine to loose coolant or oil and realistically fail after a few minutes etc. In DCS the AI soak up enormous amounts of 20 & 30 mm Mingeschoss and 50-cal and still fly around for hours trailing the same white smoke. The DCS AI also always pull up into the same boring wing over manouver and jerk around at sub 100 km/h with a FM that truly does merit to the designation SFM as in Simplified Flight Model.

 

In DCS you get tired of firing up your Fw-190D9 and doing touch and go’s at Sochi seeing the same Soviet era highrises and modern day map objects. In BoS you have a true WW2 scenery (especially like the winter late afternoon/evening scenery!) and vehicles, AA and  tanks etc.

 

So both have their pros and cons but since DCS for the moment seems more focused on pumping out new aircraft models rather than addressing the longstanding AI FM, DM and scenery issues I much prefer BoS as a WW2 sim right now.

Edited December 25, 2015 by Holtzauge

[TheElf]

I really don't get the problem people have with the PTO. Definately the one that would require the most work as it would require fleshing out of navies and carrier ops, but other then that, it is definitely not a "boring" theatre.

 

People who have a problem with the Pacific or deem it "boring" are either uneducated, or too lazy to research it to find out how rich it is in Aviation innovation and variety.  I find that the PTO is almost as misunderstood and overlooked as the Eastern Front, especially by anyone whose current freedoms and liberties (such as they might be) weren't guaranteed by the battles fought there.  I've been studying the war in the Pacific for about 20 years and there is WAY more to see when you really dig into researching it than Pearl Harbor, Midway, and Iwo Jima which to the layman is all there is to think about.  It was a massive theater covering more territory, by far than the war in the East, West, and the Med combined, yet people say its boring, or like the truly intellectually challenged "F---  the Pacifc!"  

 

Talk about an enlightened mind...LOL

 

The Pacific theater alone offers more variety, more innovation, and more intricate Air Battles than any other Theater.  Of course, queue the typical "no the Eastern Front was way better!" shouting, but as much as the Eastern Front fascinates me and can't wait to see more of it, there is such a bigger world out there than what the closed-minded Yaks vs. 109s crowd wants. 

Edited December 25, 2015 by TheElf

[ST_ami7b5]

Uneducated you say?

[TheElf]

I'd be interested in the Pacific primarily because of the carrier operations.......I'd really like to experience good graphics...and the immersion that this game has.....on the deck of a carrier......or coming in for that all important landing...low on fuel, while that deck is pitching up and down a bit.  But I hope that's after the Med theatre...and maybe Kursk.....and the Battle of France.......

I really hope the Black Sheep guys reconsider though....or I don't think we can continue here.  I mean, 30 guys....all of one accord.  This is just devastating........  

 

 

Unfortunately this sort of ill-informed sentiment veiled as humor speaks volumes about how this IL-2 Community is still suffering from an identity crisis.  While 30 people might seem like a pittance in the grand scheme of things, this is just 1 person voicing their thoughts on why IL-2 Sturmovik, in its current state just isn't hitting on all cylinders for them yet.  Its a symptom of the larger problem some, including me, have identified where a large segment of the WWII Flight sim crowd is essentially left out in the cold due to the narrow scope of the content in the Sim.

 

Vidar represents about 30 people and he's purchased the game, both BoS and BoM in fact.  How many people haven't even been reached by 777/1CGS marketing or just shrugged their shoulders and said "looks neat, but I'm not interested in the Eastern Front".  As sad and closed-minded as that is, there are probably thousands of potential customers who feel that way, and are withholding their hard earned money until BoS gives them something they really want.  Very Sad.

 

If for every 1 person on this forum who felt the way Vidar felt, you said their might be 30 more who also aren't buying, that adds up.  30 people convinced to purchase BoS alone amounts to a net of $2400.  If they got both releases, that's $4800.  and that is just one person who might speak for 30 people.  What about twice that?  3 times that?  The missing capital from these customers grows exponentially as you consider how big the flight sim community actually is.  And all that capital could be recycled into the franchise to make more EF maps and Yak/109 variants, and niche aircraft like the FW-189 or the MBR-2.

 

If this game starts to rake in money we ALL win. The sooner people start realizing that the better... 

Uneducated you say?

 

 

Did I stutter or spell something wrong for you?

Edited December 25, 2015 by TheElf

[ST_ami7b5]

...

 

Did I stutter or spell something wrong for you?

British Dictionary definitions for uneducatedExpand

uneducated

/ʌnˈɛdjʊˌkeɪtɪd/

adjective

1.

not having been educated to a good standard: poor uneducated people

[TheElf]

 

British Dictionary definitions for uneducatedExpand

uneducated

/ʌnˈɛdjʊˌkeɪtɪd/

adjective

1.

not having been educated to a good standard: poor uneducated people

 

 

 

You are aware that you can use the word "uneducated" in a variety of contexts?  In this case, being uneducated could mean that someone truly hasn't been educated on history, or is from a country where the War in the Pacific is nothing more than a sidenote in their State provided textbook.  It could mean they have never once in their life gone into a book store and purchased a book of their own accord on the War in the Pacific.

 

It could also mean that one only plays IL-2 because "Airplanes are cool, and I really loved War Thunder, so I'm going to fly airplanes online with BoS!!!  Hey, where is my Me-262 at? And why can't I fight against a Tier 1 A5M4 Claude, because I ALWAYS dominate the Claude in my Arcade Battles, just like they did in real life!!!"     

 

In any case it doesn't necessarily mean that anyone here is uneducated in the sense that they do not meet standards for the curriculum they were given.

 

As an example, I am educated about the War in the East because I have invested heavily my own money to learn about it and search out books that I can learn from, but presently I am uneducated about how to properly fly and fight the MiG-3...

[ST_ami7b5]

Are you married?
 

Edited December 25, 2015 by ST_ami7b5

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Friends, it's Christmas, can we keep it nice and friendly without punching whomever shares a different opinion? What happened to drinking and celebrating before using video-games to shoot each other up?

[ST_ami7b5]

And not just because its Christmas...

Edited December 25, 2015 by ST_ami7b5

[TheElf]

Are you married?

 

 

Sorry, I'm not interested.   But to answer your question...Yes.

 

This is my wife...Merry Chrismas!

 

Edited December 25, 2015 by TheElf

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

And not just because its Christmas...

 

Unbelievable, this is one sweet shot  Wouldn't want to be sitting in a trench while seeing those come up above me though

[ST_ami7b5]

Sorry, I'm not interested.   But to answer your question...Yes.

 

This is my wife...Merry Chrismas!

 

DSC_0114 edited_Ian_cropped_levels.jpg

 

She's beautiful!

 

All the best to you my friend  

[TheElf]

She's beautiful!

 

All the best to you my friend

 

Thanks buddy ; )

[ST_ami7b5]

Peace, Elf )

[Ace_Pilto]

I really don't get the problem people have with the PTO. Definately the one that would require the most work as it would require fleshing out of navies and carrier ops, but other then that, it is definitely not a "boring" theatre.

 

I think it's the thought that many maps will be 90% ocean that gives this idea to people, that and the fact that many people mistakenly see Japanese aircraft as being hapless flying targets.

[SCG_Neun]

Yeah....Merry Christmas Elf.  I'm sorry for any flippant remarks.  It's really not like me...Salute.  Have a "Holly" Jolly Christmas....hey is that Utah?

Edited December 26, 2015 by 4./JG53_Neun

[TheElf]

Yeah....Merry Christmas Elf.  I'm sorry for any flippant remarks.  It's really not like me...Salute.  Have a "Holly" Jolly Christmas....hey is that Utah?

 

No worries shipmate!  Nope Cali...and merry Xmas to you too!

[BSS_Sniper]

BraveSirRobin, on 25 Dec 2015 - 00:09, said:

Vidar, we really miss your constant complaining about the RoF flight models.  Ok, mostly I just miss shooting you down.

 

Why some of you are so butthurt over Vidars comments are beyond me. He made an observation, didn't slam ANY of you yet your feelings are hurt? The fact of the matter is that flying in this series feels like mush. It's sloppy. I get it, you have to work on your controls, but IMO you shouldn't have to spend weeks tweeking controls to get something close to correct. We want to like this series. We are supporters of any WWII flight sim and especially the IL2 series, but it is seriously lacking, in our opinions. All of our group have been flying since the old CFS days. Some of us flew/fly in the military, some of us fly commercially and some of us are just serious simmers, but we all agree it's a real pain fly in IL2 BOM and BOS. Again, we want to love this sim and are just hoping there are some changes to get it right. The attitudes in here sound more like they should be in War Thunder and not this community. This isn't the group of people I remember having decent conversations and debates from the old IL2 days.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Why some of you are so butthurt over Vidars comments are beyond me. He made an observation, didn't slam ANY of you yet your feelings are hurt? The fact of the matter is that flying in this series feels like mush. It's sloppy. I get it, you have to work on your controls, but IMO you shouldn't have to spend weeks tweeking controls to get something close to correct. We want to like this series. We are supporters of any WWII flight sim and especially the IL2 series, but it is seriously lacking, in our opinions. All of our group have been flying since the old CFS days. Some of us flew/fly in the military, some of us fly commercially and some of us are just serious simmers, but we all agree it's a real pain fly in IL2 BOM and BOS. Again, we want to love this sim and are just hoping there are some changes to get it right. The attitudes in here sound more like they should be in War Thunder and not this community. This isn't the group of people I remember having decent conversations and debates from the old IL2 days.

I haven't tweaked a single control and I do reasonably well. I do have a 10 cm extension on the Warthog but not a single curve or dead zone tweak. These AC have weight. Gravity and air density are modelled. The planes tend to fly and sink in a realistic way as opposed to flying on rails as all previous sims have done. If you stay within the envelope they fly extremely well. Fly outside of the envelope and they will mush, snap and/or stall. It took me a year to really learn the Fw 190.

 

Not a criticism. Just an observation.

Edited December 27, 2015 by [LBS]HerrMurf

[BraveSirRobin]

Why some of you are so butthurt over Vidars comments are beyond me.

I'm not butthurt at all. I really enjoyed shooting his whining ass down in RoF.

[Willy__]

 

 

but IMO you shouldn't have to spend weeks tweeking controls to get something close to correct

 

I didnt tweak any controls and I fly on default curves, deadzones, sensitivities, etc since day 1 of BoS and I have no problem at all. Its just a matter of getting used to it, planes dont fly on rails here. 

[II./JG77_Manu*]

I didnt tweak any controls and I fly on default curves, deadzones, sensitivities, etc since day 1 of BoS and I have no problem at all. Its just a matter of getting used to it, planes dont fly on rails here. 

Same here. Was flying with X52, Warthog, and now Warthog with extension. Never had any problem (well some learning curve at the beginning, but definitely wouldn't call that a problem), and i was always flying with default curves. It just takes some practise, more realistic then the simplified former Sims

[Hoots]

Yep same here and not wishing to denigrate clod (which I also enjoy) but those planes do fly hands off for long periods of time almost like an autopilot is on. I only fly gliders which are inherently pretty stable and even they don't let you take your hands off for very long so I find the need for several little inputs quite good.

[Bearcat]

My first post in here so I'll be straight to the point. I love the graphics and special FX this sim offers. But the Flight Model just drives me crazy and does nothing to pull me away from flying the Mustang in DCS as it makes it massive improvements and offers for the Late WWII European sim... and now the announcement of the F-4U Corsair and Iwo Jima map/campaign. The pitch and yaw responses are just way to sloppy about their respective axis. I've tried every curve and dead zone configure I can muster to deaden the sloppiness, but to no avail.

 

I have dumped a lot of my money into this program, and really took a dis-liking to the responses that came with the P-40 - really turned me off. I recently flew the MiG-3 and was presently surprised with its handling. Until this stability issue is corrected, I'm not spending another dime in IL2. 30+ other Blacksheep members are in the same mind-set. That's why you rarely see us on these servers. The word in this community is there have no interest in Pacific Theater being part of the future here. Another reason the guys don't want to waist their coin here.

 

I hope axis stability issues that resemble Rise of Flight flight model characteristics are improved here, because there are some GREAT WWII prospects in DCS World on the near horizon that will attract my hard earned money.

S!

V

 

I can relate to your excitement over the prospect of flying one of your favorite aircraft in DCS.. I feel the same way about the Mustang... and until one gets modeled in IL2-2 there will always be something missing in this series for me.. Having said that I never understood why the idea that being able to enjoy more than one sim for what it has to offer or the notion that taking any CFS on it's own terms, FM s, DMs graphics and all, seemed to be so problematic for some folks. I have yet to see a sim that gets the FMs historically 100% correct for every aircraft in it... and for me taking each sim as it's own universe with it's own physics has been the best course to lessen any frustration. From my perspective all the sims get it close enough to where I do not have to suspend belief in order to enjoy them.. and the more game type sims are just that.. games .. so they do the thing they do well enough. It's like the difference between going to see a movie and going to see a film.. Technically they are the same thing.. but when you go see a film as opposed to a movie... you just know it. You would never expect great dialog and an acting tour de force in a "movie". I could never put "No Country for Old Men" in the same category as "Hitman" ... but both are enjoyable enough in their own right. I have a similar perspective on the games I choose which was why after being all in on WoP and the Beta WT.. I just backed out of it.

 

In my opinion... DCS, CoD and IL2-2.. and even IL2 '46 are all totally different meals to be had and each one offers up it's own unique flavor but for me the fact that this series is the only one that has a steadily evolving menu that is evolving in a reasonable time frame and each new dish is just as tasty in it's own right as the previous ones already on the menu if not better, makes it my "eatery of choice" so to speak. It's my dime .. so I can dine where I want... and sometimes I want something different and at this point in the game I am just glad that I at least have some choices.