BEST Simulation Conception

[Xxzard]

I too would like to see fewer basic explosions, but don't feel that you need to limit yourself to only four aircraft!

A good working DM, especially if it considers components rather than areas would be great. I will say though, that it adds an interesting component to the game Rise of Flight, as the wing can be structurally compromised and not fall off, or you can bend the fuselage, or any number of other complicated phenomenon.

[Chivas]

The damage model of SOW is going to make a huge difference on how we fly. All the major componants of the aircraft will be modeled with their own damage model. You will no longer see smoking damaged aircraft still fighting as we've seen so many times in IL-2.

[robtek]

@BG-09
i agree that the DM is very important.
What i would like to know is where did you get the information about the quality of the DM of BoB:SoW?

[Feuerfalke]

IMHO it's pure waste of time to criticize a damage-model you don't even know and think it has to be done in a way that xy happens.

Programming a simulation is a lot more than just a basic concept. For example, your list on effects on an object may work on an RPG-game in terms of resistance, but for a flightsim, that's much to complicated, as you'd have to go for such a list for every single aircraft component. Or do you really think that a tyre has the same resistance or damage effects a wing or strut has? Even for canopy it depends on what part you hit, not to mention factors like angles, munition type and kinetic or explosive energy.

In my opinion just by reducing the number of opposing aircrafts to 2 of 4, and than to be created damage model for each one aircraft type in UNLIMITED depth

Interesting opinion. In my opinion, this is only possible when one or a combination of the following factors are available:
- unlimited financial resources
- unlimited development time
- unlimited manpower
- unlimited CPU and RAM
- unlimited lifetime (of both, programmers and software)

[AndyJWest]

How this problem can be solved?
In my opinion just by reducing the number of opposing aircrafts to 2 of 4,

What is the point in having a 'realistic' DM if the rest of the environment is totally unreal? Just what portion of WWII combat consisted of 4 only aircraft? Like most forms of design, programming computer sims involves compromise, and reducing the number of aircraft just to model the effects of lighning strikes (!) seems a particularly bad one.

In any case, until we know how the SoW:BoB damage model works, why should we assume it needs improving?

[334th_Gazoo]

Originally Posted by AndyJWest

What is the point in having a 'realistic' DM if the rest of the environment is totally unreal? Just what portion of WWII combat consisted of 4 only aircraft? Like most forms of design, programming computer sims involves compromise, and reducing the number of aircraft just to model the effects of lighning strikes (!) seems a particularly bad one.

In any case, until we know how the SoW:BoB damage model works, why should we assume it needs improving?

I agree with you without compromise we will never see this sim fly...
I'm going to be happy with what I get.
I know, that we are going to get the most realistic sim possible!
Within economic,physical, and time constraint guide lines.

Relax, enjoy it when it comes, If you are not blwn away by what you get when it comes to you, Your a bone head whiner.
Try to do better your self!! are you a specialist who could do better?

Check out this definition of specialist. You might have to read a little deep into it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._Scott_Peck

[AndyJWest]

Try to do better your self!! are you a specialist who could do better?

No, I'm not. Did I suggest that I could?

As for M. Scott Peck, can you please explain why you think he is of any relevance whatsoever to a discussion of flight simulation software. I suggest you sober up first...