What i love in Cliffs Of Dover Blitz/Desert Wings Tobruk series

[OBT-Eazy]

On 12/5/2021 at 5:31 PM, Real_Ranger said:

Like I said, I think you have to be an actual Spitfire pilot to figure out how to start the plane.  It should not be this complex.

 

I have the same problem when playing Doom or Quake.

I have to be an actual space marine to use the BFG and frag someone.  

Fortunately I know IDDQD

Edited December 8, 2021 by OBT-Eazy
add cheat code

[OBT-Mikmak]

135. The fact that during mission, you can take control on any aircraft in the battle if allowed (Alt+F1 : "Take Control of Selected AI Aircraft").

[Bloyamind]

The flight model! No idea how the real deal flies, but it's something about the weight.
I extended my wings a bit to GB and DCS, both in the Spitfire, because I'm a single-player man so far and UFO AI is not giving me much joy. I got used to the DCS Spittie and kinda love it by now though it's different. I've got half an hour in GB and it feels like arcade mode or something, it's about the feel. I'll probably get used to it at some point. What i'm trying to say is: nothing makes me feel like i'm flying a Spitfire through (thick bloody) air, in a simulated physical world, like CloD/Tobruk. Again, no clue as to how the real deal should feel, but the experience feels like... flying. Also really digging the look from up in the air. The sea looks wonderful and the color scheme feels natural, as opposed to say.. DCS. 

[Knightmare]

On 11/24/2022 at 5:03 PM, Bloyamind said:

The flight model! No idea how the real deal flies, but it's something about the weight.
I extended my wings a bit to GB and DCS, both in the Spitfire, because I'm a single-player man so far and UFO AI is not giving me much joy. I got used to the DCS Spittie and kinda love it by now though it's different. I've got half an hour in GB and it feels like arcade mode or something, it's about the feel. I'll probably get used to it at some point. What i'm trying to say is: nothing makes me feel like i'm flying a Spitfire through (thick bloody) air, in a simulated physical world, like CloD/Tobruk. Again, no clue as to how the real deal should feel, but the experience feels like... flying. Also really digging the look from up in the air. The sea looks wonderful and the color scheme feels natural, as opposed to say.. DCS. 

 

Fully agreed Bloyamind. There's nothing that beats Cliffs when it comes to the look and feel. And the fact that we're getting massive updates for sweet bugger all is just incredible. 

[Oyster_KAI]

Engine wheezing at low throttle and low RPM?

[I/JG54_chuishan]

On 11/24/2022 at 4:03 PM, Bloyamind said:

No idea how the real deal flies

 

I cannot agree more. Actually you can have a general idea about how the real aircraft flies through NACA wartime reports. Although there were no advanced computer technology back then you can still see how aircraft reacts to pilot inputs in various configurations through charts and graphs. They were of course far from pin-point accurate or very comprehensive, but you can certainly observe the trend, on how the aircraft should have responded to certain control inputs. 

 

Here is the handling qualities report for the Spitfire Va: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19930092582/downloads/19930092582.pdf

Unfortunately the BOX Spitfires cannot even match the trend recorded by the NACA report, not to mention precise responds, especially in the pitch movement. Their FM also lack the interaction between pitch and yaw axis, which is also reflected in almost every aircraft FM in BOX game... In other words the Spitfires in BOX do not have handling characteristics recorded by the NACA reports... and they even reacts in the opposite manner from the real aircraft. For example the Spitfire is known to be sensitive in pitch inputs, but BOX Spitfires react to pitch inputs in a very laggy manner. Aircraft will only respond half a second after you pull the stick... This is just the dead opposite of what a real Spitfire would respond. The real deal can be trimmed to a stall with just 5 cm of stick movement backwards in cruise configuration. 

Edited December 10, 2022 by I/JG54_chuishan

[Mysticpuma]

Smoke, fire, explosion effects, way better than anything out there. Almost perfect if we can get the plumes of debris back

[Enceladus828]

138. You cannot be injured by collisions with the ground or objects unless the plane explodes, which in that case you're dead. IL-2 GBs used to have this right but since late 2020 it's way too sensitive and while there was a fix in 5.001, it's too sensitive in regards to collisions with objects and not ditchings: Collisions with ground objects is (still) too sensitive - Technical Issues and Bug Reports - IL-2 Sturmovik Forum (il2sturmovik.com)

 

139. For Pilot DM when getting hit by fire from gunners on a bomber, it's more accurate on CloD. On IL-2 GBs I have been flying ~0.50 from a bomber in an enclosed cockpit airplane and then get hit by a bullet from the ventral gunner which instantly kills the pilot despite him not being injured previously. For both points, it's better to have the Pilot DM a bit on the forgiving side.

 

140. This was not the intent of adding the Leander class cruiser, but adding it enabled me to do a series about the HMAS Sydney (II). When I was 10 I tried recreating the last battle of the Bismarck on IL-2 1946 but since the Nelson class battleship isn't in the game I gave up. I do intend of updating this series if a future installment has a Large Freighter like the new freighters in BoN.

 

[Mysticpuma]

Regarding the fire and smoke effects. 

 

 

[Trooper117]

Great effects there...

[Bloyamind]

.. flying in formation! It's a cool challenge. And it makes you 'feel' your plane as you are relative to other aircraft around you. Points of reference

[the_finkinator69]

1. Starting a mission from the air actually puts you at the start of the action, not 60 miles from it.

 

2. the gunnery is amazing. The tracers, the sound, the recoil, it is perfect.

 

3. the damage model is second to none in my opinion. 
 

cant wait for vr

[BladeMeister]

On 12/10/2022 at 6:27 PM, Mysticpuma said:

Regarding the fire and smoke effects. 

 

 

Hmmm, love the smoke, the fire is still a bit Hollywood for me and dislike the, what I assume is supposed to look like, sparks flying off(looks like glitter). I really like the fire effect and bomb on ground explosions better back in 4.13, but that is just me. Onward and Upward! What I do love is that TFS just keeps on trying to better CLOD/DWT in so many different ways.

 

S!Blade<><

Edited December 12, 2022 by BladeMeister

[Mysticpuma]

5 hours ago, BladeMeister said:

Hmmm, love the smoke, the fire is still a bit Hollywood for me and dislike the, what I assume is supposed to look like, sparks flying off(looks like glitter). I really like the fire effect and bomb on ground explosions better back in 4.13, but that is just me. Onward and Upward! What I do love is that TFS just keeps on trying to better CLOD/DWT in so many different ways.

 

S!Blade<><

Can't disagree, lots have changed during the development and I agree the ground explosions were originally outstanding with huge plumes of dust and debris. I know these were a real fps killer though. 

 

Wouldn't it be cool with the graphics update if they also gave an option of a VFX update to add a lot more particles for those who can push their systems? 

[BOO]

31 minutes ago, Mysticpuma said:

Can't disagree, lots have changed during the development and I agree the ground explosions were originally outstanding with huge plumes of dust and debris. I know these were a real fps killer though. 

 

Wouldn't it be cool with the graphics update if they also gave an option of a VFX update to add a lot more particles for those who can push their systems? 

It’s been a good few years since the original explosions disappeared. Then I could barely manage 60 fps lows, now it’s nearer double that. I wonder how more modern cpus and gpus would cope with them now?

[343KKT_Kintaro]

Buzzsaw said that, back in 2017, TFS was granted access to an "older version" of the source code and that "the last version" had been unfortunately lost (source). So, if these smoke and fire effects had been produced (by Maddox Games maybe, I dunno) between 2011 and the moment when the "last version" was lost, perhaps such effects never will be back because they simply can not be recovered, who knows (well, maybe TFS knows). At any rate, personnaly I'm happy with the smoke effects as they are in the game, I don't feel the need to step back to previous versions.

 

Blademeister, you said those "sparks"... "look like glitter" but, to me, it's a flow of burning fuel droplets. For me, very realistic as it iss.

 

 

[Gunfreak]

1. German planes acting like German planes. In DCS or IL2. The German fighters will end up in a turn fight very quickly. In fact I can bearly remember seeing a Fw190 in IL2GB doing a boom and zoom. They always get into a turn fight. In DCS the Warbird AI seems to react based on what you do. If you fly a P47 or P51 the German AI will some times do boom and zoom, however if you fly a Spitfire or the I16 and turn inside the German planes, the AI breaks down and they just fly a lazy turn fight  

 

In Clod if you fly a 1 v 1 dogfight and you're in a Spitfire or Hurricane  vs a 109. The 109 refuses to play by the spitfire rules. It will boom and zoom and will never get into a turn fight unless it loses all it's energy. 

[Gunfreak]

2. I don't know if this is actually intended or if it's a bug. But the end resultat gives a realistic impression. 

But in CLOD you can actually force enemies to crash(something that was actually a common occurance) 

 

In Clod if you chase an enemy (particularly if many planes are chasing one plane) they can and will crash. They will sometimes do some extreme acrobatics to avoid being shot and hit the water or less commonly the ground. 

Again this might be an unintended "bug" but I think the end result is quite realistic. 

 

 

[OBT-Mikmak]

141. Seeliger effect or  "opposition effect" is implemented in Cliffs Of Dover as you can see in this picture:

 

 

Seeliger effect can be seen in this real flights video:

 

 

Here is an explanation of Seeliger effect:

 

 

[AKA_PumpkiCraterman1]

"71. The sun reflections on the canopies visible at long distance"

 

The first time I saw that I was in love ?. 

[Feldgrun]

I expect it would be even better with TruSky... if that ever happens.

[Blitzen]

All of the above! With new skies and cloud effects,and still one of the best ( if old) Chanel maps around and upcoming immersive VR ( it can’t happen too soon..) it is a simply beautiful ( eye candy wise) flight sim.

May I add the new aircraft, esp the Beaufighter are a treat!

[343KKT_Kintaro]

14 hours ago, Blitzen said:

May I add the new aircraft, esp the Beaufighter are a treat!

 

 

Agreed! But I still need to tame the beast...

 

 

[Blitzen]

I really do think the Beaufighter modelers are to be thanked now that I have “flown” her a bit more,BUT I have to say like other real life Bristol projects ( like the Blenheim,) ergonomically they are a trial…

( I have to say that compass placement & the British compass itself is for me in game a very difficult thing to read even when its right in front of me let alone way over to the right side of the beautifully modified Beaufighter cockpit…)?

[Enceladus828]

142. Despite this not being a naval sim, the effects of water entering a ship through open holes in the hull, anchor chains and vents appear to be simulated.

 

A bit of context is that in IL-2 1946, Rise of Flight and IL-2 Great Battles, a ship will sink based on static values -- if it gets hit by a torpedo or 500 lbs. bomb then it will be listed as "Destroyed" and sink. How it sinks is based on if it's hit in either the bow, stern or midships area and once it receives enough damage to sink like gets hit by a 500 lbs. bomb it suddenly stops moving and starts sinking. In Cliffs of Dover however, if the ship gets hit by a 500 lbs. bomb and that's enough to sink it then before it's listed as "Destroyed" it will continue to move forward and there are times where the ship sinks in a few minutes, other times it takes several minutes. The only times it doesn't continue to move forward is if the ship breaks in two or if it's very small like a Motor Barge or Torpedo Boat. Most importantly in Cliffs of Dover is that a ship sinking is based on dynamic values, not static values.

 

Here is a good example. 

 

In this image here the Freighter was a hit by a torpedo that not only put a large hole in the ship and is pulling the ship down but opened other holes in the hull... which shouldn't be an issue unless the ship sinks deeper.

 

 

Now the Freighter has sunk deeper into and the starboard anchor chain and hole on the side of the forecastle are reached by the water, allowing the water more points of entry into the ship. The forward moment increases the water pressure which allows a large amount of water to enter the ship. Although the bow is bobbing up the down so the two new points of entry described previously aren't always underwater, every time the bow bobs down more water enters the ship.

 

Note: the Freighter's bow was bobbing up and down many times but eventually it started settling lower in the water.

 

Both anchor chains have now submerged meaning that the foremost of the Freighter is completely flooded. With the forward hatch covers now completely underwater, massive amounts of water pours through them into the cargo holds. With the port anchor chain and forward cargo holds flooded, the starboard list is eliminated and the Freighter more or less returns to an even keel.

 

With the forecastle submerged, all buoyancy in the bow section of the Freighter is lost and it begins its final plunge to the bottom.

[Mysticpuma]

@Enceladus828that's a great summary ?

One feature it will be interesting to see (not likely before v6) , is if TFS can enable the water simulation they have access to as part of Truesky. It's easy to say Clod is an old game engine but with the new Cloud systems coming, if TFS can get the water integrated in the future, there's still a lot of life in the old girl yet. 

 

 

[5th_Barone]

One small thing would be nice to have (back):

Canopy open/close makes difference in engine sounds volume.

Used to be like this before 4.5

I hopened also a ticket on the bugtracker years ago but still there.