lol!

By that I mean it is a beta; much like any of the BETA patches released for CloD. It is not official, and is in no way answerable to the product, but is produced from an official source.

lol!

Phillip don't sweat these guys. They aren't doing any virtual flying they are on the forums constantly ragging out the chit chat.

You are getting good experience and learning about air combat sims.

If you want to improve your chit chat skills hang on the forums and do your chit chat experimenting on some of these guys... they deserve it.

What's your profile name on RoF?

You still seem to be under the misapprehension that BOB II was brought up to either denigrate COD, or for the sole reason of comparing COD unfavourably with another game. It wasn't. It was brought up only as an example of what the OP thought was a good standard of AI and campaign.

The sole criteria in that discussion was whether the AI in BOB II is any good.
Either it is or it isn't.

Details about how long it took BOB II to get to that point, whether the production process that created it was in-house or mod, or the exact proportion of developer effort directed at online compared to offline is irrelevant to the above point.

Those questions along with the 'fairness' question would be relevant if the discussion was about WHY COD's AI might be viewed as less devleoped than BOB's, or as a defense of the situation, but once again you are seeing attacks on COD where they don't exist and defending in your usual kneejerk manner. Your approach is the same here as it has been on other threads:

1. If you can't deny the opinion (BOB AI good) then broaden the debate so that you can criticise something ('yes, but they didn't have to worry about online')

2. Turn it into a 'rally to the flag' defense against the evil 'glass half empty' brigade.

3. Resort to some ridiculous caricature of other's points of view by resorting to stupidity such as: "Even the BoB II that some hold up as the BENCH MARK of flight sims"

No, it wasn't. I said that we're not really in a position to complain about CoD when there really aren't any competitors. He brought up BoB2 as a competitor. I said, fine, go play BoB2. Do you see how that works? Complaining is a waste of time. Just go play the game you enjoy playing.

Disagree 100%

Agree 100%

Well you are 100% wrong.

I brought BoB2 up to show that there were areas in CloD which meet stiff competition (if one wishes to use that word). Competition alludes to an idea that the two are competing with eachother: they are not. The point of the matter is to show that CLoD is no offline holy grail. I will play Bob2 whilst I wait for CloD to provide a better offline experience, but I will happily push the offline issues to the developers in order to hope for an improved experience.
If CloD ends up having the best AI, comms, campaign system, skin system etc in any aerial simulation it will be a win-win situation for an offline user like me. I can still fire up sims like Bob2 and enjoy them, and at the same time have the option to play a sim like CloD which is graphically brilliant (in most areas) and has an incredible DM system.

Kendo is 100% right. I don't understand the psychology you are using, Aces, to make me believe that I created this topic to bash CloD and simulataneously suggest that BoB2 is the benchmark of all flight-sims. That is so wrong.

For the record as well, Luthier himself disagrees that complaining is a waste of time. He said that, without complaints, Il-2 would never have gotten to where it was, and neither would CloD. I myself sent Oleg and Luthier pages of documents on RAF flight clothing (which don't seem to have been used to their full potential) to assist in the creation of the sim. Having Oleg contact me for this info stemmed from a complaint I made about the in-game pilots.

So that disproves both of you completely.