Jump to content
von_Michelstamm

how big can we expect bomber formations to be in BP?

Recommended Posts

On 8/10/2019 at 5:32 PM, HagarTheHorrible said:

Yes and no.  Many of the pilots and aircraft used in BoBp were drawn from units:training schools that had been specifically trained/undertrained and deployed to strike at the bomber formations. That the airborne component of the defence of the Reich virtually ceased to exist after BoBp was a question of priorities and desperation rather than tactical planning.  Outside of the scripted missions or campaign it is a bit pointless to confine the players to tactical choices taken under vastly different conditions by the two sides.

 

Possibly we are talking at cross-purposes. What I meant was that [heavy] bomber interception was no the main purpose of the groups involved in Bp. If you look at which units flew the 1st Jan mission, you have the old Western stalwarts of JG2 and 26 who had undertaken a wide variety of duties including forward interception of heavy raids. You have the units which had been moved around a lot and had no great specialization like JG53 and 77 but who had fought in the tactical air wars in the east and south as well as some larger bomber interception. Alongside these, you have the RLV veterans of JG3 and JG11 which had spent the previous year more-or-less dedicated to bomber interception.

 

Most of these units flew low-to-medium altitude operations in support of their own troops or to defend against the Allied fighter-bombers. Some of these groups returned to the RLV in the Spring and played a diminishing role against heavy raids. Some went to the Eastern Front and saw no action against large bomber formations.. My point was that interception of heavy bombers was not the primary role of the fighters gathered for the Ardennes offensive, nor were heavy bombers the primary concern of the Allies during the same month. Therefore - in my view - the lack of heavy bombers is not a huge loss for the sim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

Therefore - in my view - the lack of heavy bombers is not a huge loss for the sim

It is no loss at all. They had pretty much nothing to do with what BOBP is about. They were mainly bombing towns and industry. For the purposes of BOBP, tactical bombing, the B25 is absolutely perfect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the main focus of BOBP. We are not escorting heavies to bomb cities, we are supporting the ground troops.

 

However, I can't disagree with a simplified bomber AI. It doesn't need to be perfect, just ad hoc. That would add so much in the whole GB series.. not only in BOBP timeframe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

 

 Therefore - in my view - the lack of heavy bombers is not a huge loss for the sim

 

1 hour ago, Yogiflight said:

It is no loss at all. They had pretty much nothing to do with what BOBP is about. They were mainly bombing towns and industry. For the purposes of BOBP, tactical bombing, the B25 is absolutely perfect.

 

 

I feel that the pair of you are being far to blinkered by the premis of Bobp. Several of the aircraft included in the Bobp plane set had been chosen and/or refined for the purpose of Bomber escort or attack.  That they were used for different purposes was defined by conditions/desperation and not design purpose.  The almost complete lack of Luftwaffe opposition by 45 enabled otherwise imperfectly suited Allied aircraft to perform multiple roles, even a Russian biplane can have some success, even in the era of the jet, if it has no viable opposition.   My main attraction, for large bomber formations, is however to provide a worthwhile reason to have combat take place at higher altitudes, in the same way as having objectives on a map, without it overly impinging on recources or human player numbers, just as ground objectives do.  B 25's as envisioned and as pleasant as they will be to see, will not perform that function as they will require the same resources as any other A.I controlled aircraft.

 

Bomber attack and defence is not and should not be a secondary concern, they were the primary purpose for many of the aircraft that will be in Bobp.  Massed bomber formations would also give a feeling of freshness and variety rather than simply a continuation of the Eastern front tactical war, but with Western aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

I feel that the pair of you are being far to blinkered by the premis of Bobp. Several of the aircraft included in the Bobp plane set had been chosen and/or refined for the purpose of Bomber escort or attack.  That they were used for different purposes was defined by conditions/desperation and not design purpose

But it is exactly, what BOBP is about. It doesn't matter, that many aircrafts were constructed for a different purpose, the game is not called Battle of defense of the Reich. It is called Battle of Bodenplatte. A completely different story. Big fourmot bombers simply don't fit to the story, this game wants to tell. If you are fixed to highlevel bomber war, it is just not your game. Everything in this game shouts for low level fighting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

Bomber attack and defence is not and should not be a secondary concern, they were the primary purpose for many of the aircraft that will be in Bobp.  Massed bomber formations would also give a feeling of freshness and variety rather than simply a continuation of the Eastern front tactical war, but with Western aircraft.

 

I wonder if we'll ever see a modern flight sim designed to depict large daylight bomber formations? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Feathered_IV said:

 

I wonder if we'll ever see a modern flight sim designed to depict large daylight bomber formations? 

 

The way things are going we’ll be lucky to see any more realistic flight sims that depict WW2 aircraft.

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

The way things are going we’ll be lucky to see any more realistic flight sims that depict WW2 aircraft.

Well I was this pessimistic some years ago. I find it easier to get my hopes up now. It seems to be increasing interest 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, LuseKofte said:

Well I was this pessimistic some years ago. I find it easier to get my hopes up now. It seems to be increasing interest 

 

At least 2-3 times a month you feel the need to announce that this game isn’t for you.  Optimism doesn’t really seem to be your thing.

 

Keep in mind that this is the only developer still working on a WW2 combat flight sim.  And it’s not for you.  Why are your hopes up that there will be someone else?

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This game is not, considering the the path it chosen. 

It is about to show a strong luftwaffe in the final stages in the war opposed with planes made for escort and airsuperiority ground pounding.

It is a what if scenario.

But increasing interest means posibilities.

I still got loads of things I wish gone different.

I still find enough fun in this for a hour in a week.

 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, LuseKofte said:

This game is not, considering the the path it chosen. 

 

 

You were announcing that it wasn’t for you prior to BoBP.  You wanted bombers.  This game has bombers.  But it still wasn’t for you.  

 

The problem is that you’re not alone.  There appear to be lots of people looking for reasons to stop supporting this developer.  And this is the only one left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's just something that seems ridiculous about not being able to model heavy bombers in a world war two flight sim, at this point in time, when it's been done literally every sim before.  Imo they are going to have to decide to invest in creating simplified FMs and planes that won't be flyable by the player just to populate the single player experience or it is going to start feeling more and more lacking.  It worked okay for the eastern front, and might for PTO but again how can you have a western front wwii flight sim without the B17, B24 or lancaster in any shape or form?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

You were announcing that it wasn’t for you prior to BoBP.  You wanted bombers.  This game has bombers.  But it still wasn’t for you.  

 

The problem is that you’re not alone.  There appear to be lots of people looking for reasons to stop supporting this developer.  And this is the only one left.

We have already established this is not a full time hobby for me. What do you want? Discus why it is not? Or shall we stay on topic? 

I was not opposing your statement, just a bit surprised the negativity. All signs for increased  interest are there. Positive for all. A great deal of DCS flyers spending more and more time here and just about all cod flyers now migrated. 

This show that developers made a right choice doing what I did not like, and I respect that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, CAFulcrum said:

There's just something that seems ridiculous about not being able to model heavy bombers in a world war two flight sim, at this point in time, when it's been done literally every sim before.  Imo they are going to have to decide to invest in creating simplified FMs and planes that won't be flyable by the player just to populate the single player experience or it is going to start feeling more and more lacking.  It worked okay for the eastern front, and might for PTO but again how can you have a western front wwii flight sim without the B17, B24 or lancaster in any shape or form?

 

It's evolution.  This software was designed to offer simulations of eastern front battles.  Eastern front battles have no heavy bombers worth mentioning.    Therefore support for such airplanes was not included.  It's just not coded to do it.   

 

Now there is a desire to move to the western front.

So 1C decides to do a tactical environment that the code base can handle, while taking on the difficulties of modeling American and British planes.  Let's solve that problem.

The western map is vastly more dense than any eastern front map.  Let's solve that problem.

Now bring in the B-25.  That is more crew positions to model than any other plane to date.  Let's solve that problem.

 

Do you see the code moving closer?  Four engine bombers with 10 crew positions are not impossible, however, given what the code base is, there are considerable challenges getting there. 

 

Now it's a business decision.  It would cost 1C a lot of money to properly do a B-17.  Massive improvements in AI performance.  Massive undertaking in terms of modeling 10 crew positions.  Probably very significant effort in doing a flight model for a four engine plane.  Probably significant improvement in high altitude physics.  Very, very, very significant improvement in every aspect of performance in order to get a reasonable number of bombers into a mission.  Will the cost be recouped or will the effort bankrupt the company?  That's the decision they are faced with.

 

I hope that we see heavy bombers at some point.  I also know first hand how hard it can be evolve a very large, complex code base.  It's not nearly as easy as some think.  In the meantime what we are getting is exactly what they said we would get.  It's not ridiculous.
 

  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

It's evolution.  This software was designed to offer simulations of eastern front battles.  Eastern front battles have no heavy bombers worth mentioning.    Therefore support for such airplanes was not included.  It's just not coded to do it.   

 

Now there is a desire to move to the western front.

So 1C decides to do a tactical environment that the code base can handle, while taking on the difficulties of modeling American and British planes.  Let's solve that problem.

The western map is vastly more dense than any eastern front map.  Let's solve that problem.

Now bring in the B-25.  That is more crew positions to model than any other plane to date.  Let's solve that problem.

 

Do you see the code moving closer?  Four engine bombers with 10 crew positions are not impossible, however, given what the code base is, there are considerable challenges getting there. 

 

Now it's a business decision.  It would cost 1C a lot of money to properly do a B-17.  Massive improvements in AI performance.  Massive undertaking in terms of modeling 10 crew positions.  Probably very significant effort in doing a flight model for a four engine plane.  Probably significant improvement in high altitude physics.  Very, very, very significant improvement in every aspect of performance in order to get a reasonable number of bombers into a mission.  Will the cost be recouped or will the effort bankrupt the company?  That's the decision they are faced with.

 

I hope that we see heavy bombers at some point.  I also know first hand how hard it can be evolve a very large, complex code base.  It's not nearly as easy as some think.  In the meantime what we are getting is exactly what they said we would get.  It's not ridiculous.
 

this software was designed to offer renewed IL2 experience and the western front is a part of it.

I dont think that when they moved to IL2 they didnt look in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LuseKofte said:

I was not opposing your statement, just a bit surprised the negativity. All signs for increased  interest are there. 

 

There used to be several developers working on WW2 flight sims.  And now there is one.  And lots of people spend way too much time looking for reasons to abandon that one.

 

Better AI or I'm out.

B-17s or I'm out.

PTO or I'm out.

Better gameplay or I'm out.

 

I'm sure there are more.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, there is one developer that has announced interest in doing WWII combat and has recently released two additional WWII planes. Their sim can apparently handle at least 40 AI B-17's in formation. So far they have not put out a logical WWII package, though, but they are working on WWII content.

And then there is a dev team working on a WWII scenario in Africa, though their following does not seem to be very large nowodays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still waiting on my P-47, 262 from those guys....the team doing Africa is controlled by the same company as this...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, II./JG77_Kemp said:

 

And then there is a dev team working on a WWII scenario in Africa, though their following does not seem to be very large nowodays.

 

That isn't a dev team, that's a group of guys working on modding a game in their spare time.  And it shows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know there are big differences in engines & setup but CloD has been able to do big formations convincingly for years .I hope in the years to come Box will make similar progress. On a slightly different take....the more planes in a decent formation the more gunners who will take aim at you,& those AI guys are good! Try Jade Monkey's SM faux Battle of Britain missions and try flying against the He-111 formations. The only way to survive is to try to set up head on attacks!

As to B-17's & B-24's perhaps working out some of the kinks required to make them possible will be tested out in the ( eventul) flyable B-25's?

( I do wonder if bigger formations would be a headache for those of us who use VR devices?)

60_zps261be48b.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Voidhunger said:

this software was designed to offer renewed IL2 experience and the western front is a part of it.

I dont think that when they moved to IL2 they didnt look in the future.

 

No, this software was not born with the idea of offering you that “IL2 experiences”

 

That’s where the vision has evolved to, (with Jason in charge/Loft gone) with the exception of large 4 engine bomber formations.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gambit21 said:

 

No, this software was not born with the idea of offering you that “IL2 experiences”

 

That’s where the vision has evolved to, (with Jason in charge/Loft gone) with the exception of large 4 engine bomber formations.

hmmm you are right, that was Jason who started it. I remember that know

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

There used to be several developers working on WW2 flight sims.  And now there is one. 

Only taking odds at this statement - this is incorrect.

http://www.wingsoverthereich.com/

Edited by Redwo1f

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

There used to be several developers working on WW2 flight sims.  And now there is one.  And lots of people spend way too much time looking for reasons to abandon that one.

 

Better AI or I'm out.

B-17s or I'm out.

PTO or I'm out.

Better gameplay or I'm out.

 

I'm sure there are more.

 

Basicly I am out because of gameplay online. TAW is exception. 

But I get your point, the job is not very appreciated. 

For me it is simpler, after a period of dissapointment over abandoned PTO and a bopb I was not interested in, I can see a increased interest because of bopb. 

I wish we got more to choose from. But we havent atm. 

We might , if more come back to this genre

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, LuseKofte said:

 

Basicly I am out because of gameplay online. TAW is exception. 

But I get your point, the job is not very appreciated. 

 

Thanks for proving my point!  Why would any developer want to jump on this grenade?

2 hours ago, Redwo1f said:

Only taking odds at this statement - this is incorrect.

http://www.wingsoverthereich.com/

 

Isn’t that basically just a Combat Flight Simulator 2 mod?   20 year old graphics and flight model technology.  No MP.  

 

Edited by BraveSirRobin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

13 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

Thanks for proving my point!  Why would any developer want to jump on this grenade?

 

Isn’t that basically just a Combat Flight Simulator 2 mod?   20 year old graphics and flight model technology.  No MP.  

 

Nope to the first, nope to the second, and yes, that's correct to the third (SP only).

Go look at their site - read it, watch intro video if you want, go see the review as well.

Edited by Redwo1f

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/9/2019 at 7:42 PM, fubar_2_niner said:

Sorry to be the bearer of sad tidings, but, it has been said many times. There will be no four engine a\c :( game engine can't handle it.

 

Ha! Who would ever need four engines or more in WW1? It's a WW2 problem! 😂 us Flying Circus guys will be doing alri... uh...

 

Resultado de imagem para sikorsky bomber

 

... but who cares for the Sikorsky anyway? It's really the only thing... 🙄 ...except maybe OH NO! :dash:

 

Resultado de imagem para zeppelin german engines

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If WOTR isn't A MS Combat Flight simulator mod, why does their FAQ say this:

Quote

Licensing: You need to own Microsoft’s Combat Simulator 3 for licensing purposes. It is not needed to physically install WOTR, and you do not ned to install or load from the CFS3 disk, but we ask you please make sure you own a copy.

 

http://www.wingsoverthereich.com/index_htm_files/WOTR-FAQ.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It uses some assets from it, but the engine has been highly altered/refined and changed. They have been at it for 14 years.

Don't simply shut it down based on a preconceived notion. As has already been mentioned, we live in a tiny niche market and the number of developers working in it is very small. It is a terrific sim (honestly best AI system around for one) as is Il2 GBS (in it's graphics and flight/damage models, etc) . Best to support and enjoy the offerings and advantages that each in turn have. Even terrific work being down to this day on Il2-1946, and believe it or not, EAW continues to get improvements (a fun hobbie sim for nostalgia). Anyway, those are my thoughts. :)

 

Edited by Redwo1f

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hold on.... The game engine cant handle four engine bombers? What kind of weird stuff is that....

A world war 2 sim without bombers is nonsense imo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Redwo1f said:

 

Nope to the first, nope to the second, and yes, that's correct to the third (SP only).

Go look at their site - read it, watch intro video if you want, go see the review as well.

 

Yes to all 3, actually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Mainstay said:

Hold on.... The game engine cant handle four engine bombers? What kind of weird stuff is that....

A world war 2 sim without bombers is nonsense imo

 

Heavies using the AI protocols and flight modelling that this engine uses would take up a massive amount of resource. If you had 24 bombers in formation that would be in effect 240 individual AI operating all at once (hello 20 FPS).

Other flight sims don’t necessarily model AI aircraft using the same physics and flight modelling as the player,  as this title does.  Other sims have included heavies with dumbed down AI and very simple flight models. For want of a better phrase they are merely placeholders.

What amazes me is on one hand we have folks complaining that AI is not sophisticated enough and on the other hand folks would be happy to have dumb AI and simplified flight models for bombers. Go figure?

There are very few developers lining up to churn out WWII flight sims and few prepared to develop heavies. I’m fairly confident that to develop a highly detailed B-17 or Lancaster bomber with individual engine management, detailed damage and flight models and 10 crew positions would take a huge amount of effort, resource and money.

 

I would love to have heavies featured but I do have realistic expectations. For BOBP we are getting a B-25 initially as AI but hopefully further down the line as a flyable aircraft.

Sims from years ago did have mass formations of bombers but they had much simpler graphics not to mention flight models and the AI back then was probably not burdened with the level of complexity that this flight model has.

Maybe one day we will be able to climb into a B-17 cockpit and fly one in this sim but its highly unlikely its going to happen in the foreseeable future.                 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bopb is a bodenplatte thing with no relevance to 4 engined bombers. We get a ai B 25 and are we lucky it might be flyable one day. 

What you call nonsense, is actually the fact that you demand it   

No one wishes for a bomber of any sort as much as me, but this statement

53 minutes ago, Mainstay said:

Hold on.... The game engine cant handle four engine bombers? What kind of weird stuff is that....

A world war 2 sim without bombers is nonsense imo

Proves you have no clue what going on. 

If this pack was to contain a bombers over europe thing they might as well go PTO right away. Because it would have been cheaper. 

This pack is a dream pack and answer to request that has been there since day one from majority. 

It is meant to be a pack that can earn money not loose them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

Yes to all 3, actually.

Wow funny to see you hating on wings over the riech again, didn't you just tell me you don't go around shitting on it any chance you get? Weird to see you here.

 

It's based off the Combat flight sim 3 engine, the engines been so heavily altered that it's nothing like the stock CFS3 engine. So any game that uses another games engine is really just a mod of that game according to your logic. Guess Battlefield 5 is just a Bad company 2 mod. Better tell EA and Dice to stop charging money for it. You are too much my dude. Great for a laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JonRedcorn said:

Wow funny to see you hating on wings over the riech again

 

‘You must be mistaking me for someone else.  I’m just describing the situation with that game.  It’s a FS3 mod.  Nothing wrong with that.  But that’s what it is.

 

Btw, people talking about how great CLoD deals with large formations of bombers really need to stand down.  When that game was abandoned it was a complete disaster.  The fact that it is even playable right now is nothing short of a miracle.  The guys who saved that game did a great job.  But that game is one of the primary reasons that combat flight sims are in trouble.

Edited by BraveSirRobin
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say that having large formations of bombers, even if using dumbed down Ai and as placeholders would be much more appreciated than none at all. Having a P-51 and Mustang escort trying to defend 30-40 bombers on a mission (online or offline) would be incredibly immersive, especially in VR.

 

There is a video from 1946 showing a 50 minute bombing mission and it's just great to watch. I can (obviously at this time) only imaging how impressive B-24's  or B-17's would look in the skies of BoX, but if it's anything like the following it would be incredibly emotive and full of immersion. 

 

1521579377_DesktopScreenshot2019_08.14-12_49_22_02.thumb.png.5b2e989140dbf50bc6ef1e409ea3a2de.png

 

831940565_DesktopScreenshot2019_08.14-12_50_02_79.thumb.png.b00fc4f5270f7f625d0df3af596cdab9.png

 

 

 

 

Cheers, MP

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Mysticpuma said:

I have to say that having large formations of bombers, even if using dumbed down Ai and as placeholders would be much more appreciated than none at all. Having a P-51 and Mustang escort trying to defend 30-40 bombers on a mission (online or offline) would be incredibly immersive, especially in VR.

 

There is a video from 1946 showing a 50 minute bombing mission and it's just great to watch. I can (obviously at this time) only imaging how impressive B-24's  or B-17's would look in the skies of BoX, but if it's anything like the following it would be incredibly emotive and full of immersion. 

 

1521579377_DesktopScreenshot2019_08.14-12_49_22_02.thumb.png.5b2e989140dbf50bc6ef1e409ea3a2de.png

 

831940565_DesktopScreenshot2019_08.14-12_50_02_79.thumb.png.b00fc4f5270f7f625d0df3af596cdab9.png

 

 

 

 

Cheers, MP

I would be grateful for such big formation of B25

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think that the decision for the AI to use the same FM as players was I good idea on paper that has turned out to be more trouble than it is worth. I mean come on the AI is one of the most complained about things as they are not even very good. So basically we have all this performance hungry AI for their FM which they are not really programed to use well. Might as well have them on"rails" to gain performance for other things as on "rails" will be no worst that what we have now. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AeroAce said:

things as on "rails" will be no worst that what we have now. 

 

I'd rather them continue to do work on it and continually improve it. Putting them on rails gives up the realism the sim strives for. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...