PDA

View Full Version : Have the patches really helped AI and flight models?



Apulver
06-02-2005, 07:20 AM
I want to buy Pacific Fighters but I've read tons of reviews talking about it's mediocre flight models and poor AI.

I know that there will be a big patch out "soon," but I'm planning on buying the game "sooner"http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif if the older patches have made a substantial effect upon these problems. Otherwise I'll wait until the new patch is up.

So are the problems still prevalent? Or have the older patches made some substantial improvement in these areas?

THANKS!

VW-IceFire
06-02-2005, 07:27 AM
Do you have the other games in the series?

The bad AI thing is actually a huge mistake made by unwitting and unknowning reviewers. They are refering to the "crashing into the side of the Owen Stanley Mountains" problem. That was caused by bad values in the DGEN setup which forced the AI to fly at alts that had them run into the side of mountains. Although this happens elsewhere on the odd occasion, its nothing new or old and does not dretract from the game experience. Its a shame that most reviwers have no clue and scared away a person like yourself.

FM issues have been tweaked again and again and will be once again massively changed in 4.0 with a brand new FM engine driving the whole thing.

Effects, performance tweaks, and all sorts of things have been added to the mix since PF 3.0.

If you have the previous series of games (which I highly recommend if you don't) including Forgotten Battles and Ace Expansion Pack, things are as they were or better.

Apulver
06-02-2005, 07:36 AM
If you have the previous series of games (which I highly recommend if you don't) including Forgotten Battles and Ace Expansion Pack, things are as they were or better.

I played the original IL-2, but have not played Forgotten Battles or Ace. I've been searching everywhere --- everyone seems to have Ace but NOBODY has FB... although I don't really want to buy online. I'll drive to Electronics Boutique tonight maybe... but with Pacific Fighters at $20 its hard not to buy it as a solo install

VW-IceFire
06-02-2005, 07:41 AM
Have a look around for the Forgotten Battles Gold Pack. It has both FB and AEP.

Really, PF is ok by itself but most of us agree that its a good companion and best played with the merged install version that combines all of the products together. You just can't beat the combined might.

sapre
06-02-2005, 07:42 AM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Do you have the other games in the series?

The bad AI thing is actually a huge mistake made by unwitting and unknowning reviewers. They are refering to the "crashing into the side of the Owen Stanley Mountains" problem. That was caused by bad values in the DGEN setup which forced the AI to fly at alts that had them run into the side of mountains. Although this happens elsewhere on the odd occasion, its nothing new or old and does not dretract from the game experience. Its a shame that most reviwers have no clue and scared away a person like yourself.

FM issues have been tweaked again and again and will be once again massively changed in 4.0 with a brand new FM engine driving the whole thing.

Effects, performance tweaks, and all sorts of things have been added to the mix since PF 3.0.

If you have the previous series of games (which I highly recommend if you don't) including Forgotten Battles and Ace Expansion Pack, things are as they were or better.

Even putting aside the "crashing into the side of the Owen Stanley Mountains" problem, AI is still stupid.
Flying around circles in treetop level chasing 1 damaged enemy leaving the bombers, flying around in chains doing nothing, having eye on the back, fighting a TnB fight against a Zero in P38, unable to hit a target banking slightly and wasting entire ammo, etc etc.
Even a monkey would do better than that.
I hope 4.0 will fix these problems, although I don't think that will happen.

Buzzsaw-
06-02-2005, 07:51 AM
Salute

If you fly Paul Lowengrin's DYNAMIC CAMPAIGN GENERATOR, you should not have a problem with crashes.

When designing campaigns, the DCG has the ability to program the takeoff/landing path to an airfield, which means the AI will avoid the mountains during that phase of flight. Also you can program the 'transit' altitude, to and from the target, so that the aircraft remain higher than the mountains.

Bearcat99
06-02-2005, 08:51 AM
Originally posted by Apulver:
I want to buy Pacific Fighters but I've read tons of reviews talking about it's mediocre flight models and poor AI.

I know that there will be a big patch out "soon," but I'm planning on buying the game "sooner"http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif if the older patches have made a substantial effect upon these problems. Otherwise I'll wait until the new patch is up.

So are the problems still prevalent? Or have the older patches made some substantial improvement in these areas?

THANKS!

Dont believe everything you read. While true the AI does some hairbrained stuff... it is still the most challenging and immersive I have ever seen. Even without the patches. Get FB and Aces ASAP as they are getting scarce... as you have seen. Also hit the Sturmovik Essentials link in my sig and download a neat program called VAC. It allows you to issue voice commands for controls.... including the AI... Basic stuff like attack targets and stuff like taht but still. As far as crashing and what not.... a lot of that has more to do with the mission builder. This sim is without a doubt the absolute best WW2 sim thus far to date.... so fet PF but try your best to get the other two.. you will NOT be sorry.

Frequent_Flyer
06-02-2005, 08:53 AM
For $50 US, you can purchase Forgotten Battles, AEP and Pacific Fighters and you won't find a better entertainment value anywhere. The graphics are beautiful,the realism is second to none. There are so many flyable aircraftI've been playing since the original Il-2 and NOT flown everyone.Plus you can come to these forums with any question and there are people dedacatied to help solve them.

rummyrum
06-02-2005, 11:23 AM
AI has gotten worse across the board ,be sure.

nickdanger3
06-02-2005, 01:45 PM
Just think of the AI planes as your target drones while you are preparing to go online. That's where the fun is.

Use them to practice gunnery and then move on to online dogfights or coops.

AerialTarget
06-02-2005, 02:12 PM
Originally posted by Frequent_Flyer:
The graphics are beautiful,the realism is second to none.

The graphics are quite dated, and the realism (as well as the graphics) is nowhere near Lock On: Modern Air Combat's. Unfortunately, there's no better World War Two simulator, so as long as you have some masochistic tendencies, I recommend getting this. If you don't care if it's World War Two or modern, then get Lock On: Modern Air Combat. It looks four times as good, and is nearly twice as realistic.

ytareh
06-02-2005, 03:03 PM
Having tried to get into LOMAC twice Id have to disagree with Aerial.I find this game superior to LOMAC in almost every way.Just my opinion.

GoToAway
06-02-2005, 03:15 PM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
The graphics are quite dated, and the realism (as well as the graphics) is nowhere near Lock On: Modern Air Combat's. Unfortunately, there's no better World War Two simulator, so as long as you have some masochistic tendencies, I recommend getting this. If you don't care if it's World War Two or modern, then get Lock On: Modern Air Combat. It looks four times as good, and is nearly twice as realistic. Apparently you've never touched Falcon 4.0.

I really don't understand why you even post on this forum. All that you do is whine.

SeaFireLIV
06-02-2005, 05:03 PM
Apulver, do not take a lot of these AI complainers seriosly. Some of these guys just bring chips from their other hangups with them and actually don`t care if they discourage or send off a new potential flyer - to them it`s like a goal, one in the eye to Oleg because he doesn`t fix their personal pet hate ....

Icefire and Bearcat99 (and a couple of others) you can safely listen to. Their views are quite balanced.

My view. Yes the AI has it`s flaws, but it is still the best AI of ANY flight sim to date. They have had numerous improvements from the original: For example:

They will NOT fly out of the aircraft`s capabilities. They`ll boom and zoom/ fight or run depending on aircraft. The better fighters will even lead you high then come back on you or drag you until their wingman can pick you off.

I`ve had AI try to pull me down in a flight to try and break my wings off, scissor, barrell-roll. I`ve them panic and stall to fall to their doom in a Human way! Your wingman`s good at helping you if he`s not busy! AI CAN be snuck upon sometimes, I`ve done it.

This isn`t the half of it!

Yes, AI has it`s faults, but there is no such thing in the human scientific fraternity as a perfect AI.

Buy it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
p.s The graphics of aircraft are still great today!

canucksledge
06-02-2005, 05:16 PM
Patch?

What patch?

The one that is coming out this week? (ie:tomorrow...?)

I'd wait to see if there's a patch before I'd buy the game. Just my opinion. Specs are all up in the air now, with very few facts trickling down, at least here on Ubi's official support forum. After this "patch", your system might not be able to play it. A lot of people might not now be able to play it. Who knows? No-one. Even those who say they do. Posers, all of 'em, unless they are Oleg.

Maddox's customer service used to be second to none, now they are second to pretty much anyone around...except maybe Microsoft...

canucksledge
06-02-2005, 05:21 PM
Originally posted by GoToAway:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AerialTarget:
The graphics are quite dated, and the realism (as well as the graphics) is nowhere near Lock On: Modern Air Combat's. Unfortunately, there's no better World War Two simulator, so as long as you have some masochistic tendencies, I recommend getting this. If you don't care if it's World War Two or modern, then get Lock On: Modern Air Combat. It looks four times as good, and is nearly twice as realistic. Apparently you've never touched Falcon 4.0.

I really don't understand why you even post on this forum. All that you do is whine. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes yes! Do not post if you have anything negative to say! Verboten!

knightflyte
06-02-2005, 05:34 PM
I admit there are times when the AI can frustrate. I hate their kill steal ways, but better wingman management can alleviate that.

MY CAVEAT!!!!!

IF you're the type that will let the shortcomings of ANY game ruin your experience don't buy it. Most here play with an objective perspective and know there are shortcomings, but we can overlook them to get enjoyment from the sim. The objective is first to have fun. A few bad AI routines won't RUIN the experience. (at least not for me.....I've been known to curse the screen a few times. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif LOL)

If you're hankering to get the sim anyway when the patch is released you may as well run down and get FB/AE GOLD. and PF NOW.

The merged install is the best value you will ever encounter.
I've seen the GOLD pack for $29.00 US and PF is $29.00 tho I read someone found it for $19.00.
So for 60 bucks you get eastern theatre and pacific theatre.....OVER 120 planes...... ability to create missions, or download some really great ones from talanted creators.... and generally have a decent time overall.

If you like to fly, and simulate WW2 aerial combat you will not go wrong.

GoToAway
06-02-2005, 07:02 PM
Originally posted by canucksledge:
Yes yes! Do not post if you have anything negative to say! Verboten! There's quite a difference between offering constructive criticism and constantly whining. It seems that many here can't make that distinction, though...

Apulver
06-02-2005, 07:34 PM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
The graphics are quite dated, and the realism (as well as the graphics) is nowhere near Lock On: Modern Air Combat's. Unfortunately, there's no better World War Two simulator, so as long as you have some masochistic tendencies, I recommend getting this. If you don't care if it's World War Two or modern, then get Lock On: Modern Air Combat. It looks four times as good, and is nearly twice as realistic.

My intention isn't to turn this thread into a IL-2/LOMAC battle, but I left LOMAC for the simple reason that an AI bug prevented me from completing missions. That is partially why I am so concerned with the complaints I've heard about about PF's AI.

On a side note, I am not going to buy both IL-2: FB Gold and Pacific Fighters. I don't have the money to buy that much content. Frankly, I would PREFER to buy IL-2:FB Gold, but I can't find it anywhere. And I'm not a big fan of internet shopping, like Amazon etc.

Hopefully when the new patch comes out, the reaction will be positively strong.

AerialTarget
06-02-2005, 10:29 PM
Originally posted by GoToAway:
Apparently you've never touched Falcon 4.0.

I only touched the wretched thing once. While I am sure that it was a noble effort for its time, it is as good a portrayal of jet powered aircraft as Red Baron 3D is of Great War aeroplanes. Although Red Baron 3D is, unfortunately, the only decent Great War simulator out there, Falcon Four is neither the only nor the best modern fighter simulator. Therefore, there is no reason to touch it.

Do note, however, that I consider its age when I judge it; I am looking forward with great interest to the Falcon developers' next effort, Fighter Ops. It just may outdo Lock On for realism, if they can get basic flight physics right like the Lock On developers did, because Falcon's avionics were already more advanced and accurate than Lock On's. That was long before Lock On came out, and the Falcon team deserves some kudos for that. Unfortunately, avionics is by far the lesser part of flight, with physics comprising the greater part. This is doubly true in a dogfight - not one of those long range hide and seek missile lob contests where avionics play a much greater part, but a furball.

sapre
06-02-2005, 11:02 PM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GoToAway:
Apparently you've never touched Falcon 4.0.

I only touched the wretched thing once. While I am sure that it was a noble effort for its time, it is as good a portrayal of jet powered aircraft as Red Baron 3D is of Great War aeroplanes. Although Red Baron 3D is, unfortunately, the only decent Great War simulator out there, Falcon Four is neither the only nor the best modern fighter simulator. Therefore, there is no reason to touch it.

Do note, however, that I consider its age when I judge it; I am looking forward with great interest to the Falcon developers' next effort, Fighter Ops. It just may outdo Lock On for realism, if they can get basic flight physics right like the Lock On developers did, because Falcon's avionics were already more advanced and accurate than Lock On's. That was long before Lock On came out, and the Falcon team deserves some kudos for that. Unfortunately, avionics is by far the lesser part of flight, with physics comprising the greater part. This is doubly true in a dogfight - not one of those long range hide and seek missile lob contests where avionics play a much greater part, but a furball. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I assume you never tryed with Superpack?

TAGERT.
06-02-2005, 11:06 PM
Originally posted by Apulver:
I want to buy Pacific Fighters but I've read tons of reviews talking about it's mediocre flight models and poor AI.

I know that there will be a big patch out "soon," but I'm planning on buying the game "sooner"http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif if the older patches have made a substantial effect upon these problems. Otherwise I'll wait until the new patch is up.

So are the problems still prevalent? Or have the older patches made some substantial improvement in these areas?

THANKS! The IL2 series has the best FM and online play of any WWII sim in the past 10 years! Cept maybe a few onlnie pay-2-play games like Warbirds that might have a better online aspect.. On the flip side, IL2 series has the worst offline campain and AI of any WWII sim made in the past 10 years.

BBB_Hyperion
06-03-2005, 12:47 AM
I think the AI will be better soon .)

NerdConnected
06-03-2005, 02:54 AM
Tagert,

FM is compared to other sims very good indeed, but AI and campaigns are definitely not the worst ever made in the last 10 yrs..

The quality of graphics and the (new) FM is higher than the quality of the AI and dynamic offline campaign model in Il2. Using instead a series of hand made campaigns leaves just 1 thing to be really fixed. The offline campaign can be easily fixed, i.e. some already make replacement campaign generators.

AI still looks to be the biggest hurdle for game developers and I really hope Maddox makes some adjustments here.

If this leads to much higher cpu loads, so be it. But, let people switch the new FM and AI on or off for those who don't have a system that can handle it.

What I really hope is that they tune their sim for SMP and multithreading (Pentium D and AMD X2). It'll give so much more headroom for AI and still let us play this superb flight sim in 2006 ;-)

Mark

pettera
06-03-2005, 03:24 AM
Apulver,
A simple recommendation: Buy! (As much as you can afford.)

The complaints are really out of perspective. Everything about this game is good and most of it is extremly good. People loose perspective because the original IL2 was at its time extremly impressing. It has been reworked and rewamped considerably since then and in its present state (FB-AEP-PF-patch) it is way beyon the original in any aspect. However, improvements have been incremental and not so mind bungling as the original impact. So much of the criticism is based on a totally unrealistic expectation for mind bungling improvements every time. Also the variety of the game is incredible:
<UL TYPE=SQUARE>
<LI>Numerous planes (>100), bombers and fighters
<LI>Even more AI planes(>150)
<LI>Uncountable ground objects including eye candy such as fires
<LI>Lots of different maps
<LI>Winter and summer maps (Autumn to come)
<LI>Single missions, dynamic and static campaigns, online coop missions, and online dogfight arenas
<LI>Highly adjustable difficulty settings
<LI>Differnet weather
<LI>Light: sun, moon, stars depending on time of day.
[/list]

It is of course possible to find errors or not perfect solutions among this variety. But remeber that what you will hear about is the 0.1% that is a problem not the 99.9% that is working very well. So don't let the negative comments discourage you.

It would be very nice to have you among us. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Hope to see you in the not so friendly skies!
Petter

SeaFireLIV
06-03-2005, 04:14 AM
Originally posted by TAGERT.:
On the flip side, IL2 series has the worst offline campain and AI of any WWII sim made in the past 10 years.

Patently untrue. Never heard such rubbish in my life (well I have actually) And I`ve flown a few flight sims, Gunship, EAW, Falcon 3 and 4, CFS3 and more.

IL2 has the best AI of all these as far as dogfighting, flying, crashlanding, etc is concerned.

You guys sure like to muddy the waters so new prospective flyers just give up even trying IL2/PF. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

But then you probably really knew what you said wasn`t true anyway.

sapre
06-03-2005, 05:25 AM
It's really quite offensive saying IL2's AI is the worst 1 in 10 years.
Sure, it's nothing great, but still it's one of best one around next to Mig Alley and EAW.
I mean, how can you even COMPARE it with the AI of CFS2?
That was the most idiotic and stupid AI i've seen in my life.

Apulver
06-03-2005, 07:38 AM
Not taking into account the upcoming patch, will the AI be improved/fixed by doing a merged install as opposed to a PF install only?

It will take me a while for sure before I get online.... my flight skills have definitely declined in my absence from the genre

Bluedog72
06-03-2005, 07:52 AM
Merged install or PF only doesnt matter in that regard, no.
The only differance is a merged install gets all the goodies that made up the game before Pacific Fighters came along, ie Forgotton Battles and the Aces Expansion Pack.

So a merged install of the game is just PF with about 100 or so more planes, and a heap more maps, but the AI is the same in both.

Think of FB:AEP as the expansion you are going to need to get for Pacific Fighters to make it a great game, rather than just a good one.

raisen
06-03-2005, 07:57 AM
Last patch does seem to have decreased the AI's ability to fly formation. The number of times they can be seen blundering into each other can be a little frustrating.

Raisen

JFC_Slumped
06-03-2005, 08:01 AM
I don't know why everybody is always banging on about LOMAC. Modern air to air is ****. Get within 30 miles, blip on the radar, launch missle, go home. Some modern jets don't even have a gun or cannon.
WWII is much more interesting, and the IL2 series are the best games for it.

rummyrum
06-03-2005, 08:03 AM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TAGERT.:
On the flip side, IL2 series has the worst offline campain and AI of any WWII sim made in the past 10 years.

Patently untrue. Never heard such rubbish in my life (well I have actually) And I`ve flown a few flight sims, Gunship, EAW, Falcon 3 and 4, CFS3 and more.

IL2 has the best AI of all these as far as dogfighting, flying, crashlanding, etc is concerned.

You guys sure like to muddy the waters so new prospective flyers just give up even trying IL2/PF. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

But then you probably really knew what you said wasn`t true anyway. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Read the title of the thread, no where is it about comparison, one post about LOMAC changed the direction. The thread starter seems informed enough to know about upcoming patches so why treat him like a child with padded responses. This game is not void of issues, Oleg will be the firt to admit that and if it was a perfect as some make it we would not get patches or even an evolution of the game. Lift your head out of the sand.

SeaFireLIV
06-03-2005, 08:14 AM
But tell me, worse AI in TEN YEARS?

I can intensively (and have in the past) list the GOOD and BAD things about the AI. So far all I`ve seen in this thread is IL2/PF being put down about how bad the AI is with no evidence, examples placed whatsoever. The true posts being drowned out. This is obviously coming from people who probably only play online and have never played 2-3 intensive offline campaigns to really see what the AI can and cannot do. I`m here to redress the false reports and give balance.

Take your head out of the sand first, m8, before telling others. I know my words are true. If you want my list of where the AI is good and bad I`ll place it here for you to read if you can be bothered instead of making dumb comments with no backup. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

sapre
06-03-2005, 08:39 AM
Originally posted by JFC_Slumped:
I don't know why everybody is always banging on about LOMAC. Modern air to air is ****. Get within 30 miles, blip on the radar, launch missle, go home. Some modern jets don't even have a gun or cannon.
WWII is much more interesting, and the IL2 series are the best games for it.

Umm...
WHAT!? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

bolillo_loco
06-03-2005, 08:41 AM
Originally posted by Apulver:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">If you have the previous series of games (which I highly recommend if you don't) including Forgotten Battles and Ace Expansion Pack, things are as they were or better.

I played the original IL-2, but have not played Forgotten Battles or Ace. I've been searching everywhere --- everyone seems to have Ace but NOBODY has FB... although I don't really want to buy online. I'll drive to Electronics Boutique tonight maybe... but with Pacific Fighters at $20 its hard not to buy it as a solo install </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

hum, you should live in my county, 130,000 people and eb games recieved 4 copies of IL-2, 4 copies of FB, 4 copies of AEP, and 4 copies of PF. They still have 3 copies of each game because nobody buys it. The manager who has been there for five years and knows me by sight and name told me that I am the only one that buys the WWII flight sims.

AerialTarget
06-03-2005, 02:18 PM
Originally posted by JFC_Slumped:
I don't know why everybody is always banging on about LOMAC. Modern air to air is ****. Get within 30 miles, blip on the radar, launch missle, go home. Some modern jets don't even have a gun or cannon.
WWII is much more interesting, and the IL2 series are the best games for it.

I agree with you completely. I only wish to inform potential buyers that, although IL-2 is the most realisic World War Two simulator out there, it is rather unrealistic compared to Lock On. If one doesn't care which era they fly in, Lock On is a much better choice.

By the way, all of the planes in Lock On have guns. Indeed, my friend and I used guns almost exclusively, although he liked to play with Sidewinders as well. But it's still too easy, what with the automatic aim pipper and the higher rate of fire and bullet velocity.

TooCooL34
06-03-2005, 02:35 PM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
I agree with you completely. I only wish to inform potential buyers that, although IL-2 is the most realisic World War Two simulator out there, it is rather unrealistic compared to Lock On. If one doesn't care which era they fly in, Lock On is a much better choice.

By the way, all of the planes in Lock On have guns. Indeed, my friend and I used guns almost exclusively, although he liked to play with Sidewinders as well. But it's still too easy, what with the automatic aim pipper and the higher rate of fire and bullet velocity.
Interesting opinion. Impressive. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

SeaFireLIV
06-03-2005, 02:39 PM
These fishing snipers crack me up. They pop out, take a shot with some ridiculous comment. Then hide away.

They`re the sort that simply won`t take you on face to face. My fault for caring too much I guess.

AerialTarget
06-03-2005, 10:22 PM
But, for the most part, he's right. At least he has a good point. Most Lock On players never see an enemy aircraft. They like doing the beyond visual range stuff, which is four parts luck and one part skill (and that one part skill is mostly avionics skill, not flight skill). It's almost as boring as launching missiles from one location on the ground to another location on the ground.

However, he is wrong about that being all that Lock On is. Lock On can have some very good dogfights, even gun fights. They just don't take nearly the amount of skill that IL-2 fights do. In short, I enjoy playing IL-2 more than Lock On because the fights involve more skill and because I like World War Two aerial combat much better than modern air combat. However, Lock On is much more realistic, having both a better general physics model and much more accurate individual flight models.

You can "interesting opinion" me all you want. The fact is that I have done my research and you have not. I know that Lock On is a far more accurate portrayal of aerial combat than IL-2. We'll see if the big patch changes that; that is, after all, the only reason I bought Pacific Fighters a week ago.

TooCooL34
06-04-2005, 07:37 AM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
You can "interesting opinion" me all you want. The fact is that I have done my research and you have not. I know that Lock On is a far more accurate portrayal of aerial combat than IL-2. We'll see if the big patch changes that; that is, after all, the only reason I bought Pacific Fighters a week ago.
I don't do any research that makes people get sick. You have too much time.

SeaNorris
06-04-2005, 07:52 AM
Originally posted by TooCooL34:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AerialTarget:
You can "interesting opinion" me all you want. The fact is that I have done my research and you have not. I know that Lock On is a far more accurate portrayal of aerial combat than IL-2. We'll see if the big patch changes that; that is, after all, the only reason I bought Pacific Fighters a week ago.
I don't do any research that makes people get sick. You have too much time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey I remember now, Lock-On and IL-2 were set in the same time period, no, they are completely different http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

DuxCorvan
06-04-2005, 09:06 AM
My only gripe about Il-2 series is that all effort since FB has focused in improving the online experience, specially the light-minded dogfight servers. Any step given till the date only points in that direction.

Many of us have no free time enough to date people on a specific date and time of day, the only way to join online coops, which are the mort realistic and funny of online experiences.

So, the only way we can enjoy is thru offline gaming, but this is a part of the game that has been forgotten once and again, with an offline experience that degrades continuously. It's only thanks to efforts by people like Lowengrin and Extreme One that we offliners can stiil enjoy this to a significant amount.

Because:

- Helpless AI has not been improved in any way since the original -except for things that seem to obey more to players' imagination that to a reality. Still it crashes in pre-scripted manoeuvers -specially landings, ignores sure targets, use wrong tactics, disobey orders and do weird things ad nauseam. To compensate and have a chance, AI just "cheats" in a very irritating way. Superaccurate aiming, omniscient awareness, overpowered engines and tireless stalking is just an example of a wide repertory.

- Retail dynamic campaigns are badly designed, scarce and unimmersive. The UI and the 'between mission' stuff is as dry and uninspiring as being presented a brick for your birthday. After so long a development, dynamic campaign system (DGEN) has gone only thru minor, irrelevant tweaks, and a 3rd party product (DCG) has become hugely better almost in any aspect.

- Retail single missions are mostly unexistent. You can do them with a very limited mission builder that allows almost no scripting and it's very tiring and tricky to use, or download them from very kind guys that must have much time and patience.

- Much 'immersive' stuff -maps and objects- is missing -although Maddox can't be in justice be blamed for it. They're more victims than anything else, and still have accepted to include and work in a lot of 3rd party stuff -mostly planes- that will make us happier.

- System requirements grow and grow, while dogfight onliners can prescinde of much AI CPU workload. Soon offliners and coop offliners may need top PCs to manage all the AI routines and the new, more complex, FMs, while dogfight onliners just manage their own plane's ones.

My opinion is: FB/AEP/PF has become a great online game and a poor offline experience. I still enjoy it -it has plenty planes, very well made, and, despite some shortcomings about stalls and energy, FMs look excellent to me, but I always feel sad of so much potential being scattered and lost because of the lack of some kind of planned articulation. The thing looks more and more a much better version of the "Air Warrior" online series.

It's like an excellent make-it-yourself toolkit, with some pieces lost.

Of course, I still love its quality and the chance to fly the most unfairly ignored machines of WW2, and besides... there's nothing else out there that can compete with it.

Waiting for BoB.

AerialTarget
06-04-2005, 02:13 PM
Originally posted by TooCooL34:
I don't do any research

Clearly... By the way, ignorance isn't healthy, either. However, research on proper subjects - such as World War Two aviation - is good for you. If children today were not brought up slaves to that abhorrent appliance, the television, they might actually enjoy reading, as I do. I can spend twelve hours reading about World War Two aviation and not even notice the time until I just happen to glance at the clock.

J_Weaver
06-04-2005, 03:57 PM
I totally agree Dux. The offline "silent majority" has been largely over looked. The most annoying thing is the ai's super accuracy in a head-on pass but their inablilty to make simple deflection shots. But even with all the flaws the Il2 series is the greatest WWII flight sim ever made.

ICDP
06-04-2005, 04:48 PM
Originally posted by DuxCorvan:
My only gripe about Il-2 series is that all effort since FB has focused in improving the online experience, specially the light-minded dogfight servers. Any step given till the date only points in that direction.

Many of us have no free time enough to date people on a specific date and time of day, the only way to join online coops, which are the mort realistic and funny of online experiences.

So, the only way we can enjoy is thru offline gaming, but this is a part of the game that has been forgotten once and again, with an offline experience that degrades continuously. It's only thanks to efforts by people like Lowengrin and Extreme One that we offliners can stiil enjoy this to a significant amount.

Because:

- Helpless AI has not been improved in any way since the original -except for things that seem to obey more to players' imagination that to a reality. Still it crashes in pre-scripted manoeuvers -specially landings, ignores sure targets, use wrong tactics, disobey orders and do weird things ad nauseam. To compensate and have a chance, AI just "cheats" in a very irritating way. Superaccurate aiming, omniscient awareness, overpowered engines and tireless stalking is just an example of a wide repertory.

- Retail dynamic campaigns are badly designed, scarce and unimmersive. The UI and the 'between mission' stuff is as dry and uninspiring as being presented a brick for your birthday. After so long a development, dynamic campaign system (DGEN) has gone only thru minor, irrelevant tweaks, and a 3rd party product (DCG) has become hugely better almost in any aspect.

- Retail single missions are mostly unexistent. You can do them with a very limited mission builder that allows almost no scripting and it's very tiring and tricky to use, or download them from very kind guys that must have much time and patience.

- Much 'immersive' stuff -maps and objects- is missing -although Maddox can't be in justice be blamed for it. They're more victims than anything else, and still have accepted to include and work in a lot of 3rd party stuff -mostly planes- that will make us happier.

- System requirements grow and grow, while dogfight onliners can prescinde of much AI CPU workload. Soon offliners and coop offliners may need top PCs to manage all the AI routines and the new, more complex, FMs, while dogfight onliners just manage their own plane's ones.

My opinion is: FB/AEP/PF has become a great online game and a poor offline experience. I still enjoy it -it has plenty planes, very well made, and, despite some shortcomings about stalls and energy, FMs look excellent to me, but I always feel sad of so much potential being scattered and lost because of the lack of some kind of planned articulation. The thing looks more and more a much better version of the "Air Warrior" online series.

It's like an excellent make-it-yourself toolkit, with some pieces lost.

Of course, I still love its quality and the chance to fly the most unfairly ignored machines of WW2, and besides... there's nothing else out there that can compete with it.

Waiting for BoB.

You have put into words what most of us offliners have been thinking for years. Some are of the opinion that the AI in PF is excellent, each to their own I suppose. In reality for all the reason you have outlined above the AI can't possibly be anything other than mediocre. I can have a decent dogfight against ace AI but only because it blatantly cheats. The offline experience in the entire IL2 series has NEVER EVER been anything other than poor at best.

The built in dynamic campaign system is by far the least immersive seen in any flightsim. The comms between you and friendly AI/GC is awful and totally worthless. The bomber campaigns are total suicide because all of your friendly "escorts" leave you alone to chase a single smoking enemy aircraft. The immersion is non-existant, you don't care about your friendly AI because they are totally anonymous and worthless. I have never been saved by a friendly AI wingman, they will say "I'm on him" etc but they never are. I gave up playing offline campaigns (all versions inc. DCG) because it is not immerseve to have 20+ enemy fighters chasing you AND ONLY YOU all the way accross the map.

It is obvious that the offline aspect of this sim is only given a fleeting (if even that) thought by the devs. The upcoming patch even has new clouds that will only be useful online, the AI will see through them like they don't exist. Given this obvious lack of interest for the offliners, who comprise roughly 90% of sales (according to Oleg) I don't expect much in the way of offline quality from 1C for the upcoming BoB. I really hope I am wrong in this prediction but I won't be surprised if I am right.

Great online aspect
Great graphics
Great FM (improving with upcoming patch)

No immersion offline
Poor campaigns offline
Average AI (overall) I have learned to accept their limitations

This is a great sim but it really needs to have the offline aspect COMPLETELY OVERHAULED.

AerialTarget
06-04-2005, 06:49 PM
Originally posted by J_Weaver:
the Il2 series is the greatest WWII flight sim ever made.

I agree with that statement, but it's really not saying a whole lot. The fact is that no really realistic World War Two simulator has been made. In fact, there's never been a really realistic Great War simulator, nor a Korean War simulator, nor a Vietname simulator. The only really realistic aerial combat simulator out there is Lock On: Modern Air Combat. And it has unrealisms, too, although much fewer and far between than IL-2's or Red Baron 3D's.

IL-2 is, it is true, "the most realistic World War Two simulator ever," but it's only sort of realistic. Anyone who has done their research should see that, though many who have done research still deny it because they wear red tinted goggles. And anyone who has not done any research is a fool to argue the point, because is is foolish to argue when you do not know what you are talking about in the slightest. Far too many people take what simulators show them as gospel, and valiantly attempt to fight ignorance armed with that pitiful, often erroneous, knowledge.

Bearcat99
06-05-2005, 07:07 AM
Apulver.... this sim is not perfect. I have noticed some of these guys with thier batteries on thier shoulders. As far as AI target drones..... these guys must be flying in a different sim or they are using rookie AI or very simple settings. I can gaurantee you that if you close your cockpit.. or turn off icons... or both and mix up your AI with most of them veteran... a few average, aces & rookies thrown in with both sides, yours and the enemy, and set the plane types and numbers accordingly you will be challenged.

Some of these guys in here have nothing positive to say about anything and they think that crying and moaning like some little kid is going to make them seem intelligent instead of sucking it up and using what they have.

How much control do you have over AI in any CFS series? EAW? Janes? Can you tell your AI to attack, help you, return to base etc in these other sims? Toss in VAC (Voice Activated Commands... get it in the Essentials link or Airwarfare.com) and you have a sim where you can actually talk to your AI..... talk about immersion. Can you set each individual AI in a full mission to a different skill level? And garaphics..... dated graphics??!!!?! Puuuhhhhlease. Dont even listen to anyone who pans the sim and yet remains ther... he is either a liar or an idiot at worse, or disingenuous and a troublemaking complainer with a nonsoultion oriented modus operandi when it come to dealing with issues. While true online is the best way to go for obvious reasons, offline is no barrel of cr@p by any means.. People who are either too lazy or suipid (Or to be fair just dont have the time....) to learn to make thier own missions or tweak others that they downloaded cry and moan about how bad things are but they offer or seek no solutions to make it better.

Offline this is the most versatile challenging sim pound for pound I have ever flown.. if it had triggers and a few more AI commands it would be even better. While it does get frustrating when you ask for help from AI that doesnt come.... or when they steal your kill... or when they shoot over your shoulder at your target and put holes in your wing... or when they go through an entire mission and come back with a load... after you have told them umpteen times to attack the target... it is still pretty challenging..... and I think it has gotten better between IL2 and FB 3.04.....but then Im no Ace like these guys who think it is so lackluster either so .... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

WOLFMondo
06-05-2005, 08:00 AM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Frequent_Flyer:
The graphics are beautiful,the realism is second to none.

The graphics are quite dated, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't look dated to me running on perfect, with no texture compression etc, everything is absolutly maxed out and it looks fantastic.

sapre
06-05-2005, 04:20 PM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
Apulver.... this sim is not perfect. I have noticed some of these guys with thier batteries on thier shoulders. As far as AI target drones..... these guys must be flying in a different sim or they are using rookie AI or very simple settings. I can gaurantee you that if you close your cockpit.. or turn off icons... or both and mix up your AI with most of them veteran... a few average, aces & rookies thrown in with both sides, yours and the enemy, and set the plane types and numbers accordingly you will be challenged.

Some of these guys in here have nothing positive to say about anything and they think that crying and moaning like some little kid is going to make them seem intelligent instead of sucking it up and using what they have.

How much control do you have over AI in any CFS series? EAW? Janes? Can you tell your AI to attack, help you, return to base etc in these other sims? Toss in VAC (Voice Activated Commands... get it in the Essentials link or Airwarfare.com) and you have a sim where you can actually talk to your AI..... talk about immersion. Can you set each individual AI in a full mission to a different skill level? And garaphics..... dated graphics??!!!?! Puuuhhhhlease. Dont even listen to anyone who pans the sim and yet remains ther... he is either a liar or an idiot at worse, or disingenuous and a troublemaking complainer with a nonsoultion oriented modus operandi when it come to dealing with issues. While true online is the best way to go for obvious reasons, offline is no barrel of cr@p by any means.. People who are either too lazy or suipid (Or to be fair just dont have the time....) to learn to make thier own missions or tweak others that they downloaded cry and moan about how bad things are but they offer or seek no solutions to make it better.

Offline this is the most versatile challenging sim pound for pound I have ever flown.. if it had triggers and a few more AI commands it would be even better. While it does get frustrating when you ask for help from AI that doesnt come.... or when they steal your kill... or when they shoot over your shoulder at your target and put holes in your wing... or when they go through an entire mission and come back with a load... after you have told them umpteen times to attack the target... it is still pretty challenging..... and I think it has gotten better between IL2 and FB 3.04.....but then Im no Ace like these guys who think it is so lackluster either so .... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Of everything you listed above, EAW does it all, and better then IL2 IMO.

Bearcat99
06-05-2005, 04:41 PM
So you are saying the graphics and FMs/DMs in EAW are better? Im talking total package here.

arcadeace
06-05-2005, 05:32 PM
I rarely play the stock campaigns. I download some very good ones and single missions. When I make my own it seems I'm able to make the AI not crash into anything and I don't consider myself overly proficient with the mission builder. I just don't have the problem when setting the proper height, speed and course over my selected theater and terrain. The friendlies can crash on landing but so what?



Originally posted by Bearcat99:
As far as AI target drones..... these guys must be flying in a different sim or they are using rookie AI or very simple settings. I can gaurantee you that if you close your cockpit.. or turn off icons... or both and mix up your AI with most of them veteran... a few average, aces & rookies thrown in with both sides, yours and the enemy, and set the plane types and numbers accordingly you will be challenge.

I am at a loss to understand offliners claiming the enemy AI is not challenging enough. Yeah there are obvious flaws, mentioned, but I begin to wonder 'am I this bad?'

sapre
06-05-2005, 06:40 PM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
So you are saying the graphics and FMs/DMs in EAW are better? Im talking total package here.

I'm talking about the AI.
Ofcourse the FM and graphics is better in IL2.

Bearcat99
06-05-2005, 08:49 PM
Originally posted by sapre:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bearcat99:
So you are saying the graphics and FMs/DMs in EAW are better? Im talking total package here.

I'm talking about the AI.
Ofcourse the FM and graphics is better in IL2. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Im talking total package here.... EAW & CFS are dated..... even the flight routines of the AI, The FMs and DMs.... Like Arcadeace I just dont see where offliners have been so "shortchanged". Especially not to the point that some of the posters here have complained.... I just dont see it. It coukld always be better but what we have is PDG.

Popey109
06-05-2005, 10:01 PM
Nobody flies FB+PF anymore because those others are so much better? You can create your own scripted campaigns€¦or you can use DGen witch try€s to create a historical dynamic campaign (meaning the end is historical but missions are random)€¦or you can use Lowengrins Dynamic campaign generator and conquer the world. If that aint enough for you than go on-line and make war to your harts content in Co-ops or dog fight rooms or even on-line campaigns€¦Yae! Like I€ll ever load CFS 3 again€¦the AI can€t land for sh*t€¦ http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Jex_TG
06-06-2005, 07:49 AM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by J_Weaver:
the Il2 series is the greatest WWII flight sim ever made.

I agree with that statement, but it's really not saying a whole lot. The fact is that no really realistic World War Two simulator has been made. In fact, there's never been a really realistic Great War simulator, nor a Korean War simulator, nor a Vietname simulator. The only really realistic aerial combat simulator out there is Lock On: Modern Air Combat. And it has unrealisms, too, although much fewer and far between than IL-2's or Red Baron 3D's. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again try falcon 4.0, with the super packs, or wait for the re-release of falcon (allied assault or something, goes gold end of july).

Having never played falcon until about 9 months ago, I really can testify that this is (now) a truly great combat sim. Yes it had problems but they are pretty much ironed out, the re-release makes it even more stable.

Falcon 4.0's success comes down to one thing - the dynamic campaign. You say no real portrayal of korea - well Falcon has a theoretical war going on as north invades south (ok but it's modern, not prop). Over 5000 units are computed, each one acting to its environment. This means that you can hook up, online with 12 other guys, all flying out, and have another 20 friendly AI flights operating around you (not to mention all the ground units and enemy air AI).

If you want immersion, plus the most realistic cockpit ever (clickable cockpit with the ability to start up the engine from cold using the correct start-up that falcon pilots use) and a whole war to fly in then this is the game for you.

Lock on is OK, but has no DC. With no DC, lock on fades away into obscurity. Who wants to fly the same mission twice? You want simulated combat - that means no prior knowledge of what to expect. Want to DL missions - good luck. Out of all the missions made, only a few are worth flying. Want a whole war going on? No chance - lock on Mission Editor means massive frames loss with lots of units.

Falcon however keeps track of over 5000 units and will run on a 400mhz machine. OK the graphics aren't that great, the MP code could use (and is getting) some tweaking, but the immersion factor is 100%. No other flight sim comes close to this (and I've flown a few). I honestly recommend getting falcon, joining http://www.freebirdswing.org and Download their install for falcon. Then hook up on their team speak server and take a flight with 7 other guys.

From the initial planning to flying to rtb, everything from start to finish is immersive. Flight models don't mean so much if there is no immersion. I can't say how good falcon's FM is but it feels pretty good. Are there areas to improve on it - yes but only to add to the game, nothing seems that critical.

Fighter Ops is being made (but could be vapourware), but is being built on the back of falcon 4.0, from what I've read. This is great and I really hope it works but it is a long way off. Until it gets here I really recommend trying falcon (get it off ebay or get a copy off a mate http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif)

SeaFireLIV
06-06-2005, 08:19 AM
I definitely agree that the Campaign in Falcon 4.0 is very good. Better than the IL2 Campaign which is somewhat sterile in comparison (DCG makes up for this).

But I don`t agree with some of the graphic/FM and AI complaints here.