Anyone heard anything about this?

http://www.boldgames.com/products/woe/woe.html

http://www.boldgames.com/pr/woepress.html

A US release only?

What the hell? Looks to nice to be true!
Does it have Modern avionics for the f-15 and the A-10 like hud and ccip? DAMM THAT WOULD BE TO NICE!

Looks damn familiar..quite low system specs, totally open architecture for a big modding community, and by the same publisher as Wings Over Vietnam.

Wings Over Europe...nah, can't be...??

Strange.

Hmm using planes that are already created for SP1/Wov such as the Hunter, A-10, F-15, Harrier. There seems to be nothing new I hope all thier models are original too

Guess this is what is in the making then. I've heard rumors of some new games on the same engine as SFP1. Anyway, this is good since now I guess new avionics will be possible to model such as more advanced HUD, radar and MFD.

Interesting. We shall see what becomes of this.

Yes interesting indeed.

I wonder which these 12 cold-war era aircrafts are except the seven listed: F-100, F-105, F-4, F-15, A-10, Hunter, AV-8.

Maybe: MiG-21, MiG-25, Su-17, Su-25... what if... nah, they couldn't... could they have modeled a Su-15?

More likely is probably the A-4.

Is that a MiG 23 being shot down on the box picture?

Does that mean the Forums will change to:

StrikeFighters/Wings Over Vietnam/Wings Over Europe

Tk never used free addons to make his games.....he always did his own models.............so the hunter the f-15 and the harrier will be it's own creations in terms of design

But whatever will come it's a great news.........now with the a-10 we know that will have more advanced avionique ...and with the f-15 maybe a more advanced RWR...who knows?

Unbelievable! I'm totally puzzled ...
TK got us by surprise here!

I don't think there will be MFDs, because early versions of those modern planes didn't have that.
I think they will model the F-15A for example

Anyway, this is too good, because there will be HUDs and I hope to be wrong with MFDs

"Available this april"
YEESSSS!!!

AFAIK Adv RWRs and stuff are already in the coding (ie, USAF : Air Dominance)

Destineer just implemented the coding into the TW Engine

Guess That Means We Get a Larger Audience, and TW Benifits from the Already 1,000s of addons done already by community.. which people will flock to this title for that alone,

the deciding factor is availiblility, after 1 week WoV disapeared from EBGames and Gamestop and is only availible in walmart thru a Vietnam Package..

So.... the Publisher Betta Make Sure the Game stors all get their copies and Walmart bestbuy get theirs as well..

Odd, the Minumum HDD space Required is "1.2 BB"

It Says you Can Pilot 12 of the Cold War Fighters, But it only liests 7 so 5 are missing from teh list..

well if SFG is anything to go by - F4B,C,D,E, and J

Theres nothing on Thirdwires homepage about this - I can see a pattern forming though....

2005 Wings over Vietnam
2006 Wings over Europe
2007 Wings over Iraq
2008 Wings over the Falklands
2009 Wings over Vietnam (Gold)

etc etc

Wings over France (WWI) ...

Not entirely. I picked up my WOV 4 weeks ago from Gamestop here in town. The next day they already had another copy on the shelf ready to go. It's not all the way off the shelfs, just got to find the right places If this is a new sim, it sure sounds like a win buy to me. And yes, I sure hope we get a more advanced hud, this bombing by sight thing is killing me! :rolleyes:

Sign me up for opening day!


The Jedi Master

Real men don't need CCIP.

Yeah sounds sad with no CCIP......LOL.

Where's Gonzales and Indigo?

Whoa!

Totally caught by surprise.

It does say something about hundreds of other aircraft
available, so the architecture should be similar.

This has all the patch 4 itemas listed as well. Gotta go
order it...

As my father would say... "HUD babies"

But seriously, I cannot wait to see how this shapes up, and I'm thrilled to hear that TK and them are still going strong.

How about "Wings over the Pacific"?

Wings Anthology If You Will...

Hm...

This special passage makes me cautious:
Campaign scenarios are set throughout the 1960s and mid-1970s
Sound not new to me...!

Let's first see what SP4 for SFP1 and WoV will bring.(CCIP at least)

It looks to be new in the sense it will feature a new theater (Europe) and new 1960s/1970s aircraft (A-10A, F-15A, Harrier).

Inevitable question: When's the release date?

"April"

That's all the site says anyway...

In addition to my previous post concerning better avioics: Radar antenna tilt...!

Lets See, I Already Have a List Of planes and Stuff im going to Copy Over

So... where's the Navy stuff? I'm hoping there's some Balkans or North Sea maps? Is this all shore-based?

Shoot, I'm buying it anyway. What it lacks can be added. I wonder if there will be a patch to backwards upgrade with the new features, as always.

Yeah TK say that all the features that are in Wings over Europe are included in Patch 4

what do you think of this sentence?

Do you think we'll get some extra options in the random mission generator?

Wings Over Everywhere.

We have a winner!

Third Wire Anthology

Comming from a man that can't do CAS without CBU this is a remarcable quote , Dave

CBU, CBU's stick like glue, stick to women and children too. :p

dude ... wasn't that about Napalm?

Yeah but that is the USAFMTL remix....

DJ USAFMTL in da hangar!!!


The Jedi Master

*Gasps* Was that out loud??

Now maybe I can hit something besides the Comm Center !

Talk about an ambush! ROCK ON!

pfunk

Or how about this,

Wing Over World or Wing Over Earth?




Eagle out...

I hope, one day TK will think of doing Wings over the Indian Sub-continent(India/Pak)

Dont Forget teh WWI Sim.. Wings Over Normandy... lmao

Wings over WalMart !

Wings Over the Federated States of Micronesia, Wings Over Yo' Mama's House, etc etc. This looks good.

PS where might I find a list of PLANNED updates of SP4???

Apart the 3d clouds and the fact that we'll get tv system (the screen from tk)............nobody really knows......apart probably the beta testers

Wings over the Wings of Wings over Vietnam

hopefully it's more than a lazy continuation of a yawn-inducing series, and will actually bring campaigns with a bit of life. probably not though...same sterility, different skins. yahoo...

We'll see in time........with each major release tk improve it's engine......the only question now is .....in what proportions will it be this time?

Summup what we know

1) 3 cloud and new light/environnement effect
2) more advanced avionics
3) and maybe a more advanced support of the vectoring thrust (since the harrier will featured in the next game)

it's quite a good improvements...

What we know that lacks too?

Definitely sfp1 have a poor ai......hopefully maybe tk hear us and improve it in the next release

More life in the campaign....it would be cool (and the free modders already prove that we can have a campaign with plenty of unit to bring more life on the battle field)

of course every body have it's own wish.....but the last two things come back often on the table

Let's be positive.....so much have been done......tomorrow can only be better

Gonzales was on a cruise ship in the Western Caribbean when all of this was posted, and he came home to a very nice surprise!
--


Mark

......!370HSSV

:rolleyes:

I hate to be a master of the obvious but the alternative is?

Heck, things are improving, I'm very good with that.
It's better than the zip-dot-squat coming from anywhere
else, ya know?

Which is pretty much what Dave said with fewer words...

Do you believe that we will get improved FM for Harriers?? If yes, will be possible to apply to choppers.
Another thing, what time is the game framed?? Late 70's, early 80's??

They have oldies like the F-100 with new planes such as the F-15 and A-10, so my guess is late 70s, or very early 80s (most NATO F-100s were retired between 1978 and 1982).

Ew, can you imagine what a chump you would feel like if WWIII broke out in 1980 and you were still flying a Hun?

Yeah right... :rolleyes:

Are you coming here just to start crap or is trolling your past time? :rolleyes: If you dont have anything consructive to say why bother coming over here?

I vote new AI. That is a number one on my wishlist.

Screw it...

I want "Wings Over Galactica" !!!

Great to hear that we will have a new sim available soon!
From what I read this sim is going to be out soon but even so I want to make few requests/sugestion:
- I would like to be able to play with the Canadian squadrons based in Europe (in West Germany to be more precise). It seems that Wings over Europe action takes places during late 70's and begining of the 80's, so those squadrons would be incially equiped with F-104s (CF-104) and later with F/A-18s (CF-188).

Negative, just my two cents. Disagreed? Too bad. I'll give it anyway

Oh wonderful, more agreeing and disagreeing.


Hey there ricnunes, I think the CF-5A would fit better into it as well as the CF-104.

EDIT:
But if it is by 3rdWire then the CF188 that is out for SFP1 will work in WOE. I am doing some more skins, a Armed Forces nose and 409 SQN for now. I have a hacked LAU3 to fill in for the CRV-7s. Would be nice to get a pilot for it with the old style helmet.

Alright...knock it off fellas..return to your corners...

A suggestion..if you don't have constructive criticism then why come in here and stir stuff up. You are entitled to an opinion...why not voice it with respect?

BeachAV8R

Come on USAFMTL, take it easy. No offense intended. Really.

The F-104 is probably not in the game because of the infamous copyright problems with Lockheed Martin (that also affected Pacific Fighters). You can put the F-104 from Strike Fighters in there yourself though.

As for the F-18, I think we can assume the game doesn't include support for MFDs because the most recent aircraft is the F-15A. But third party Hornets can of course be added.

Are you going to buy it Chappy?

We have quite a few Canucks in this community and if the MP is improved it would be interesting to see a Canadianized CF-5A/CF-18 flights for the hell of it.

Well it happens everytime a patch or when WOV came out. People form other forums would come over here and start crap for no reason. Hey some are pissed off about Strike Fighters Wal Mart incident and cant seem to let it go. Since then, TK releases something the worms come out of the bad apples. Only to troll. I am getting sick of it. I am not going to other forums and talking any crap about what sim they like. So why should they come here and do it? We have a sim we like. Is that a crime? To each his own but it isnt worth getting into sim wars over it.

As I understand it, Ubi/1C's main troubles came from Northrop-Grumman, not Lockheed Martin. Aces Expansion pack had the P-38J and P-38L, and a later patch for Pacific Fighters included another version of the P-38L. I've always assumed the reason a P-38F/G/H was never released was that pre-release problems among Pacific Fighters and Maddox combined the NTG debacle sucked most of the time and money (and desire) to build new models for PF, not any specific troubles with Lockheed. I know Lockheed made a fuss about the Starfighter in Strike Fighters Gold (and may have said something to 1C about the P-38?), but it also seemed to me the problems have been somewhat resolved, as the Value Soft version of Strike Fighters has an F-104G back in, and the Gold version has an F-104G downloadable add-on. I just figured the lack of a Starfighter in WoV had as much to do with the type's minimal role in SE Asia as with any Lockheed Martin legal troubles. Anyway, Heroes of the Pacific and Blazing Angels both include old NTG aircraft without any legal or finincial problems from NTG (and 21st Century Toys a while ago released a 1/18 model of the F-104), so I guess I thought that Thirdwire had been able to find a similar solution concerning Lockheed.

However, the lack of any world of an F-104G in WoE (where, considering its role with the Luftwaffe and RCAF it would be most appropriate), I guess I am beginning to wonder again. Is Lockheed-Martin still precluding the use of the F-104 Thirdwire sims, or is WoE simply not entending to model the Luftwaffe and RCAF in WoE?

From TK...

"Lockheed is the only company that demands other game companies pay them for the rights to use their product's name/images in game, and threaten to sue if you don't pony up. They do legally own all IP associated with their products, and they also have computer game division who would potentially lose profit if others use their product names (or so they claim )

I'm not sure if its on 100% solid ground legally, as names like F-104 and C-130 are government issued and are in public domain, but we weren't going to test that theory against a multi-billion dollar comany's legal team... Sadly, legal rights often goes to the one with more money...

Licencing product names are not all that uncommon, a lot of driving games have licences from car manufactureres, and Novalogic also paid Lockheed to put their name on their F-22 and F-16 games, etc. Usually, its done to attract more buyers, putting "licenced by XYZ!" on the box makes it more "authentic"...

Anyway, because of this, all our future products will be 100% Lockheed-free." - TK

http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=363&highlight=f22
--


Mark

Well probably not. Unles of course you assure me it is an hardcore sim like F4 or Jane's F/A-18.

OK, no problem.

You're right, I had them mixed up.

TK did include the Grumman A-6 in Wings over Vietnam though.

So TK can include Grumman planes, but not Lockheed.

Maddox can include (it would seem) Lockheed planes, not Grumman.

Lock-On: Modern Air Combat includes Lockheed and Northrop-Grumman aircraft as AI.

Combat Flight Simulator 3 had Lockheed planes (no need for Grumman aircraft due to it's subject matter). Then again, Microsoft could probably afford to buy out Lockheed and fire their lawyers if Lockheed ever gave MS any trouble over the P-38, so that may not be a valid example. However, various third party developers have created payware add-ons featuring Grumman and Lockheed aircraft, with seemingly minimal interference.

Heroes of the Pacific and Blazing Angels manage to include Lockheed and Grumman aircraft. Supposedly Grumman approached the Heroes team, who promptly told Grumman to bugger off, which they did. I've heard nothing of Lockheed bothering either one.

I'm not doubting the veracity of anybody's stories here; quite the opposite. I'm just wondering how and why Lockheed and Grumman are deciding who to pick on. Lockheed forbids Thirdwire from using the F-104G without paying a fee (because of a possible Lockheed designed F-104 sim? Yeah right . . .), but doesn't seem to have a problem with MSCFS3 or FB/PF using the P-38. Grumman nearly wrecked the release Pacific Fighters over the use of the Yorktown and Avenger, but evidently has not noticed or cared that Thirdwire is using the A-6 Intruder in WoV. And no one is reported getting on Eagle Dynamics back for the Hawkeye or C-130 in Lock On. I guess I just don't get it.

The good new for sims/simmers in general is that Heroes of the Pacific exposed NTG's copyright claims as legally bogus. Ubi's caving to Grumman on Pacific Fighters had more to do with the expert timing of Grumman's threat to block the release in the US than with the soundness of their claims. Though not as immediately critical for Third Wire (since any plane not in the commercial release can be add-ed easily enough by third party freeware), I do hope the Heroe's precedent is expanded to Lockheed's (IP my foot) dealings with Thirdwire, if not in time for the initial release of WoE then eventually at least, and to any other flight sim designers (Eagle Dynmics or Maddox Games). I would be very much distressed to see a permantently P-38 excluded from future WWII ETO or PTO sims.

I can assure you that it WON'T be...

"It is still a light, casual flight sim, not a not a hard-core flight sim. If you enjoy SFP1/WOV, I'm sure you'll enjoy this as well It does NOT have every little features everyone's been asking for, and it still does NOT include the kitchen sink, but it does have enough new features to cover the planes list, which means HUD, CCIP, EO- and Laser-guided bombs and missiles (although all operations are streamlined and simplified to fit the casual flight sim profile)." - TK

http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=2348&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=8

Personally, this is what I want (and expect) in a combat survey flight sim where I can fly just about anything that flies. WWI is also coming and I'm also looking forward to a SF-based space sim one day...

"If we have to do a space sim, we would probably do an open-ended sim and let modders add ships from their favorite show..." - TK

http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=1864&start=0

I would have no interest in flying other planes in Falcon but the F-16 and I do enjoy doing so occasionally (study sims are fascinating) but I also want to have fun with a lighter survey sim.

You already know what SF is all about Chappy so why are you here dissing it?
--


Mark

Yes sure, how could I forget the CF-5!
But from what I read in the event of a possible WWIII as we will see in Wings over Europe it would be more probable to see the CF-5 operating in a Scandinavian scenario (deployed in Norway) than in Germany where I supose the action in Wings over Europe will be, right? Even so, I agree that it would be great to also have the CF-5 in WoE.

About the CF-18, I was hoping to see it in WoE but if MFDs aren't going to be modeled than I guess that there isn't much sense to model it, is it?

Correction, TK did include the A-6 Intruder and NOT the Grumman A-6 Intruder.
Check here:
http://www.wovgame.com/

And this is inded a way to overcome the IP in case of military aircraft (for example the "A-6 Intruder" is not a company name but it's instead a military name, therefore public).
TK even admited this in public (see MGonzales post) but he seems to be afraid put a F-104 (or other Lockheed aircraft) in his games.

But I do think that not having the F-104 in Wings over Europe will be a major fault in this game since in that time-frame where the action will take place the F-104 was considered the "NATO fighter".
Here's a list of NATO countries that used during WoE time-frame the F-104 and would most probably enter in such conflict:
-Canada
-Denmark
-West Germany
-Greece
-Turkey
-Italy

But, fortunally there's the possibility of adding the SPF1 F-104 in Wings over Europe. I just whish that Canadian squadrons are made available in the WoE's campaign.

EDIT:

Because of the problems that happened yesterday with SimHQ this post became duplicate, Sorry.

As SaQSon and others made clear regarding the NTG-Pacific Fighters debacle, Grumman was claiming rights to the likeness of the product, not just the company name or designation. Ubi printing "Grumman" on the back of their box gave NTG added leverage (and probably sealed the fate of the TBF cockpit and the Yorktown in Pacific Fighters), but it was not the crux of the issue. I imagine Lockheed adopted a similar attitude.

Anyway, it is sad Lockheed is taking this tack with Thirdwire. I know the F-104 and C-130 can be added in easliy enough, but not including it in the package could hurt sales a little; I know I pretyy much bought the original Strike Fighters to fly the Starfighter in combat.

Forget the copyright issues, gotta have Dick Chaney's favorite jet for sure, the FU-UP "Chicken Hawk".

I hear he's lookin' for some cowboys to ride shotgun!

Keh??

huh???
FU-UP is that some cool slacker term that means you intend to do bodily harm to someone?

Were you trying to be funny, FlyXWire? Political comments need not apply.

pfunk

Well why don't you complain about this copyright BS to a sympathic congressmen to get it changed (like maybe to the incarcerated and ex-jet jock Randy "the Duke" Cunningham).......I'm sure he's got a lot of connections within the defense industry!

You don't think talking about current and past military hardware appropriations is political???

Yes, but legally a company (like Lockheed or Grumman) can only claim rights if one of it's trademark names are used and the problem with Pacific fighters was only and only because it cleary said in the box "Grumman". The names like TBF or F-104 are government names and those companies use internally diferent names from those that the government gives. This makes sense specially if you look at Wings over Vietnam website you'll see that you have as flyables the following aircraft:

F-4 Phantom II (and not McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II)
F-105 Thunderchief (and not Republic F-105 Thunderchief)
A-4 Skyhawk (and not McDonnell Douglas A-4 Skyhawk)
A-6 Intruder (and not Grumman A-6 Intruder)

and so on...

I'm not laughing. Commenting on the decision by TK to not include LM-licensed aircraft in his sim is perfectly within your purview, you can register your disappointment to your heart's content, so long as you're polite about it. It's when you get obnoxious and start bringing in political garbage into a thread dealing with a new simulation. I'd do the same if someone were ragging any other political leader, foreign or domestic. Avoid incendiary comments like the two you've posted in the future, please.

pfunk

Any more bad tempers and this post goes into room 101...
cheers
Russ

By the way, I read somewhere that there is a screenshot showing a missile camera in Wing over Europe but I can't find it. Could someone post the link?
Thanks in advance...

Do you mean like a Maverick or LGB camera?

I haven't seen any screenshots of that, but TK did promise electro-optically guided weapons so it should be in the game.

Yes,
it could be from any of them.

Looking forward to what TK has planned, looks great so far! It seems funny, when you go around flight sim forums, that the idea that combat flight sims are going away, slowly but surely. Then you see TK do his work, plus this group just got together, and you wonder where the idea that "combat flight sims are dead" is coming from! lol

http://www.fighterops.com/

eddie

eddie,
I agree, although some might say that most of the "new" releases are actually reworks of previous titles.

And I don't have a bit of a problem with that. Look at Falcon 4: Allied Force. Yes, it's based on Falcon 4, but there is so much improved and additional material in there it's incredible.

Black Shark is coming out pretty soon and I'm looking forward to that as well.

Fighter Ops is a terrific project that I sincerely hope works the way they want it to. It's been under development for a while.

All I need is more time to play.

Speaking of fighter ops, is it MMO? I can't tell from a glance at the website, and I'm kinda too lazy to look harder. LOL.

Can't wait for WoE. It's gonna be a good one.

Sims are dead.....my ass they arent....we got some good times coming again soon.

I guess yeah it is going to be changed. It said it would be released on April, but I haven't seen it on any gamestore website.

i'd like to apologize to you guys about the way i worded this post- it wasn't constructive at all, and my own reservations about sfp1/wov aside, i should at least give tk the benefit of the doubt to see if he can address the shortcomings of the series with this latest installment.

I'm with you on this pepper. I bought WoV because I always wanted to fly the vietnam era jets (especially F-105 Iron Hand....oh well). And was disappointed by the terrain, FM's, AI, random mission generator, lack of proper avionics...and the list goes on. I found it good for a quick gunzo dogfight and that's about it. It's not even on my HDD anywmore.

I would love for this new installment to get it right(IMHO), but I am definitely in wait and see mode.

Colt

Can you be more specific on what needed to be done right for WOV? Not trying to flame you, I am curious.

I like the SF/WOV series because after being a hard core simmer for years with F4 and JF/A-18E, I wanted something which was more fun and less work.


Your thoughts?

This series isn't about simulating aerial combat ......but to make gaming warm and cuddly, with gizmos, and wizbangs for the technique-challenged who just want to sit back and push buttons for fun.

What a pathetic loser

ADMIN EDIT: Don't tell people to shut up.

Your thoughts.......forget it.

!370HSSV

Hey look at me!

Putt...putt...putt...I'm in a SPAD!

ADMIN EDIT: Speaky banning?

Your thoughts.......forget it.

FlyXwire's right. These games are nothing compared to 'real' sims like Falcon 4.0 or Jane's F/A-18. I tried SFP1 once and was really dissappointed with the lack of realism. So I got rid of it.

You can't compare apples with pears.

SFP1/WOV were never supposed to be 'real' or 'hardcore' games.

TK pointed that out often enough.

No thats just your matter of opinion which is fair enough.

Unless someone decides to create "Flight of the Intruder 2.0" then I will stick with WOV.
I have Falcon4:AF and WOV and think they are both great in their own ways

And this new title is a run and duck cop-out....'Wings Over Europe: Cold War Gone Hot'???

Reality Check.....it's fantasy.

Ideal venue for a sim totally lacking in accuracy, with a fantastical semi-historical setting, leaving no ability to fact check......PERFECT!!!

"You can't compare apples with pears."

You can't compare fantasy to reality either.....PERFECT!!!

(another run and duck "Chicken Hawk" title)



Your thoughts.......forget it.

I don't think anybody ever said this was a real sim. It is only pretend. Is it possible to have a real simulation? Remember, sims are only a different form of the toys that you used to build highways with in your sandbox as a child.

You have to use your imagination. You guys like the sims where you can read big manuals about switches and things and then sit down and try to pretend you are a real combat pilot flying these. I hope none of you guys are wearing helmets and flight suits during this. Its the same thing in MSFS. I know guys who read think manuals for planes they bought and go through the whole startup procedure to get it up and flying. Its still not real, it only simulated.

Its that level of simulation that seems to start the big rants here. I don't know why I would if I had bought a game and didn't like it, would go into that forum and continue to call it down. Why do you do this? The game had problems at the start. It isn't the greatest when it comes to immersion but we that use it all seem to enjoy it. I am sure that when the new WOE comes out that we that will buy will enjoy it. I think most members of this forum know what to expect when that game comes to the shelves.

I should go to Janes F18 forum and Falcon 4 and see who from this forum is over there calling down your sim. It would be interesting to know.

EDIT:
Just after browsing Janes FA-18 and Falcon 4 AF forum here at SimHQ very quickly, only found 1 ref.
http://www.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=32;t=009674

I don't see you guys there hacking on it.

This thread went from a discussion started by a guy talking about 3rdWires new WOE to the typical guy coming in and ranting "again" about the game that they don't like and don't have on their harddrive. Tired of seeing this in a forum that is supposed to be for getting things right in that game. I would have locked it on page 3 and told others to go play with their sims.

Well putt...putt...putt...

Reality bites bud, aint no fantasy!

You seem like a reasonable guy Saguanay, what are you doing here?



Your thoughts.......forget it.

you dont know what you are talking about at all

I like the game. I want to be entertained when I play this. I had was it Janes F-15? Graphics sucked when compared to SFP1 but it had cool features. This game has lots that could be but then again the guy who made it first got sucker punched by that Walmart release. It was never supposed to be a heavy involved sim.

The same could be said I guess between Comanche 4 and some of the haevy involved thinck book helo sims. Now Comanche 4 is cool but then it has the arcade functions. Meet the criteria to win the mission or it shuts down the game and you lose. I am very happy that SFP1 / WOV / WOE doesn't and won't have that arcade feature.

Thats one thing I like about SFP1, ya fail and you still get to fly home. When I get an extra $30 I'll pick up Falcon 4 and LOMAC and Janes FA-18 then I can compare and like those bits that I find. I'll need a new comp I guess for some of it.

Can you explain the reality check comments? What is supposed to be checked in relation to reality?

WOE is going to be a game set in the 70's where the Soviets come across the border. Its a what if is all.

Falcon 4.0 and Jane's F/A-18 aren't 'real' sims either, they're games.
Real sims are what the military spends millions of dollars on to train their pilots.
About the only real simulation that's actually available to the public is Steel Beasts Pro PE which is a real military training tool.
Also, if you find SFP1 and WoV so distasteful, why are you here and not flying Falcon 4.0 and/or Jane's F/A-18?

As a public service reminder to the members of this particular forum who do actually have, and enjoy SFP1/WoV.
Please Don't Feed The Trolls, it's not worth getting banned over.

OK, your sucker punching, fine.

Can you answer the Reality check question?

I don't understand why people put this game down, I am no flying expert, but no other game has caught and kept my attention for this long, and is not only the modders, but the creators of this FUN game, yes FUN, that's why I play it, because is FUN!

Well Jane's USAF was my first flight sim ever and I gotta admit I really enjoyed it and it was a real fun game. I put SFP1/WOV/WOE in the same category. Fun game.

Chappy and FlyX, I'm sure you're both reasonable guys who think you're trying to 'enlighten the uneducated sim masses', but the reality is that we all know what you're preaching. The greater majority of us know the limitations of SFP1/WoV. We know about the detail and immersive factor of F4 and JF/A-18. We know.

And we don't care. We like the simplicity of SFP1. We like not having to memorize a manual to fly our 'silly little computer game' (to quote my wife). We like being able to jump on the PC and fly a mission in 30 minutes or an hour.

I know in your minds you think that 'if they're not gonna do it 'right' then why bother?' Well, for us, this is right. It fits in with the amount of time and energy we have to put into a flight sim. You guys have more time and energy for your simming...that's fantastic! I wish we all did, but we don't.

So please, consider us all educated. We know what we have and what we don't, and we're quite happy being the mouth-breathing trolls that you all think we are. You can now return to your forums knowing that you made an attempt to swing the uneducated horde to your point of view. Just let us have our little corner of the internet free from derision for not 'flying' a 'real' simulation.

Yes it is fun thats why I like it. I wish it could have the ability to lock up ships at distance with the radar and shoot them vice clsing to visual range. I wish we had better nav systems like MSFS and could do the beacon and ILS around airfields. I wish that we could have a guy be able to make a ATC / fighter controller radar program for use in multiplayer. MSFS has four of those available for use now.

All wishes, all may or may not come but its still fun rolling in on target and dropping iron.

What baffles me is why do people troll through forums, where for the most part people enjoy reading and sharing information with each other, and start trashing on those who enjoy (in this case) the game they are playing?

Thank you Chappy, you hit it right on the head.
"a fun game"


FlyX you want immersion???? Sign on the dotted line and take that big ole brain of yours and join the service, fly all the "realistic" simulators you want. If you think about it thats the best way to get that true to life real feel.

For once can you please show some maturity and knock this off?

that's typical arrogant answer from a person who does not know what he is talking about. don't you have anything constructive to do in life? The problem with people like you is that the entire day you sit in front of your PC flying F4 or JF-18 and imagining that you are in the skies flying a real F-16 or a F-18. I Pity you

I flew Falcon 4 a couple of times, then I realised it would be quicker to emigrate to America, get a green card, join the USAF and become a pilot. For some reason I don't see what's great about having to learn the correct start up sequence for the engines, or the weapons system, or the radar. Memorising checks is the worst part of flying anything, if there was some way of avoiding doing it in real life people would.
SF/WoV are fun pick up and play games for those of us with real lives. If your life is empty enough to actually have the time to learn all the arcane procedures in those more complicated games maybe you should get out more, get a hobby, get laid, that sort of thing.
Me I'm waiting for Wings Over Europe so I can scream around at low level in some familiar places without getting busted, and blow stuff up. The Falcon 4 fans out there can carry on reading their manuals.

Why isn't this Person banned?

OK EVERYONE BE SILENT abouit comparing SF1 to Lomac or Falcon 4.0, and I apology for yelling this out, but I have to get something from my chest out...

So listen to my honest feeling and what I truly know about SF1. I have been there when SF1 and TK's team was developing SF1 in first place, and I used to tell to myself something.

I once had a dream... Something I truly wished for something that most of us simmers would like to see in combat aircraft simulators. Somthing that are pure realistic, but in simple way. I can remember the day when FIghter Anthology was one of most entertainmenting simulator I ever have flown during old mid 1990s. Falcon 3.0 or Flanker simulator may be very rich in pure 'hardcore' of realism in every of way, but often I felt exhausted when having to learn so much of control, buttons, especially reading very thick maunal book on each of aircraft and it took too much of my time. When I would just jump into cockpit of aircraft, only having to know the whole flight's surface control system, especially few buttons to operate radars of air to air and air to ground, especially an addition of few buttons to operate radars's searching, locking on, and firing weapons in right conditions is something I always have dreamed, but in realistic way as well. Falcon 4.0 and LOMAC was very realistic but is too over 'hardcore' in my tastes, but I respect the way they have turned these simulators into. I always have dreamed of a simulator that would have existed in the way I would ever dreamed of, being pure realistic but in simple way, or shall I call it 'Simplecore" instead of 'hardcore' ?

However, back to my topic, when TK was developing this simulators in excalty way I dreamed of it, I was over joyed by it, and even better, this simulator is also designed to be pure moddable so so many hundred of new aircrafts, terrains, effects, an enchancd of orginal terrains would be done by third party. I also would enjoy flying so vast number of aircraft, especially when the Flight model were being done by expert aerodynamic/aerouanitcal expert people, while weaopns would be done by famous weapons packs team, and list goes on...

Strike Fighter: Project one was, and is, and will always be the true simulator that cover everything in simple way, so you would not have to learn many of bloody 'check up', hundred of buttons, especially reading someone's very long, scary maunals on over hundred of aircrafts. In SF1, Wing over Vietnam, and incoming of Wing of Europe, you would just jump into aircraft, memorying the surface control, radar operating, misiles's conditions of firing while trusting your own instinct/experiences to get jobs done. And no, it is not always easy to fly in SF1/WOV while the AI, weapons and other features kept being so vastly improved in new of released patches, especially in add-on mods that were done by great community of SF1 to improve SF1/WOV into even futher in next level.

That is why folks whom are pure 'hardcore' can never, I repeat, NEVER compare this SF1 to LOMAC or Falcon 4.0, where you would constantly have to be in very sharp all time, focusing in book/targets/missions planning, then do bloody long 'check up' jobs, then take off, then do 'hardcore' jobs. Not everyone of us want that, but simply jump into cockpit and do 'simple' jobs to jobs done in missions.

I have huge respect to TK and his team that made this dream, of not only mine but many of simmers out.

Unless you are actually training to be actual combat pilots or want extremely 'hardcore' then go and fly Falcon 4.0/LOMAC and this SF1 is not place for you.

But for someone who want realistic but simple simulator or pure 'fun' experience, this SF1 is perfect place for you to experience this.


Eagle out...

A friend of mine who was a Sea Harrier pilot at the time was at an airshow standing by his mighty steed (alright it was a Sea Harrier but you get the idea). A scruffy punter comes up to him and starts spinning dits about flying sorties over Bosnia. My friend not wishing to be rude to someone who might be a fellow aviator, despite his apperance as some sort of crack whore, listens politely until he eventually twigs the guy is some sort of flight sim fetishist who's never got closer to the controls of an airplane than sitting in the back of an easyJet flight to Barcelona. Playing F4 and F/A-18 in no way makes you more real a pilot than SF or WoV , otherwise with the amount of time I spent playing Hidden and Dangerous I'd be in the SAS.

Oh I let the mods know. His time is short here. I know what he is doing and I am not biting.

How was this brought on by Column 5 and/or USAFMTL??? No, NO never mind i really don't want to read it.

Seems to me this was an attack from you at them.

FlyXWire,

I'm a nice guy and you've been warned once. You obviously don't listen very well, or you don't take hints well. You have exactly 15 minutes to clean up your insulting posts and remove the image before I do it for you. Along with sending you to the time-out chair. Geez, I feel like I'm talking to one of my elementary school students.

The rest of you have been showing commendable restraint. Thank you.

pfunk

I know I'm slow sometimes but I re-read this entire thread again and agree with you 100%.
--


Mark

You just summed up why SFP1 doesn't fit the bill for alot of simmers. Most of us will never get the opportunnity to operate a real combat aircraft, and no on can deny that a sim(game people) is still a far cry from actually putting your life on the line, but the very fact that so much learning is required to operate sims like F4AF and FC is exactly why I prefer them.

I got bored very quickly with WoV because there was no challenge to any of the A/C's operation. The missions didn't provide nearly the same satisfaction as say F4AF. When you finally land that F-16 after succesfully prosecuting a mission you feel like you actually did something. You brought together your knowledge of the A/C's capabilites together with your understanding of threats, hit your target and got home, flew the pattern (following ATC), and brought it in. A complete mission experience in an environment filled with other A/C and ground units going about their business of war.

Please don't consider this a flame. You guys have every right to enjoy the level of sim that SFP1/WoV is and WoE probably will be. But it's not for everyone.

And USAFMTL I responded to your PM. basically I bought WoV hoping for some Iron Hand and got none. That is the deficiency in avionics that I see in WoV. Even if it was omitted from A/C like the F-4, A-6, and F-105 (due to the equipment requiring a second crewman) they could have implemented the capabilities of the A-4.

Granted this line of Sims is not for everyone. And open and constructive Opinions should be welcomed....

But this is all out Insults ment to start a Fight. Nothing constructive here. Nothing positive here. Just Insults.

I know it would be wishful thinking, But I wish that those who don't like this Line of Sims and can't stand not to post without trying to Insult the Cummunity or a small group of persons, Would just not post.... But I all to well know that I don't live in a perfect World....

Maybe FlyXWire should take his own advise and

SHHUUUDDDUUUUPPP!!!......

SF/WOV is not for everyone and to each his own. These things are meant to be fun for the end user. I am a sim junkie, I got LOMAC and F4:AF, IL2/AEP/PF etc. I play them all. I mod some, I paint planes. Its what I like. When the WWI sim comes out I will get that too. In the end we all have something we like. (And hopefully works out of the box and wont isntall crap on your computer... Starforce ahem...)

Then why do you come here and bash SF/WoV??? Be happy in your own little ultra-realistic sim world. Copy???

Hey, I like easy sims too!

(whatever gave you that impression)

Be happy, don't worry....unless you need to!

Time to take a shower......

Whoa whoa whoa there, I see one serious flaw in your arguement. You said that simmers will never have an oppunrity to experience such of pure intense combat missions in SF1/WOV, you have failed to realize that each time patches get releasd, they constanty become improved and I will bet you that next of incoming patches will even enchant the experience of SF1/WOV to next level, while WOE would be released as new simulator soon. And oh yeah, dont forget about custom missions that would place you in intense missions.

Often I have felt so good after I have gone missions where the hell rose from ground to air, and I have bloody fought all the way back to homebase after destroying targets and it was alot of fun.

However, I know one thing for sure is that these are nothing compared to even next new patches after SP4, especially more of new missions of third party that would come out after SP4. But to me, you sounded like you are too used to pure hardcore where you would have maunal on your leg, while flying and clicking on over thousands of buttons and doing many tasks at once.

But I know how you feel when you do these many of tasks in pure hardcore, but again, like I said, SF1/WOV have been evolving into better sims than the first release of SF1 when it suffered many problems, no thank to first strategy that forced TK's team to rush their products.

Like I said, this SF1 community is NOT place for pure hardcore for you, and if you strongly disliked SF1 and that enjoy hardcore sims respectfully, then why bother posting over here, apart from posting your own options in here. I dont see any of your posts being fit in here, and that is why I never bothered posting at Falcon 4.0 and LOMAC thread and say "this sim is too hardcore for my tastes, I prefer SF1..." but instead I devoted my supports to SF1 community. You should do the same, keep your posts to hardcore sims forum and support these community instead of wasting on insulting the community of SF1, especially Tk who work really hard that got this SF1 to survive through hardships in first place!


Eagle out...

Why I post here about this is because I WISH there was a hardcore sim with the modablility and great community of SFP1! If TK would come out with a hardcore sim like the SFP1 series it would be the greatest sim ever! So maybe if there is enough interest shown (IE people posting so other people know) this will one day happen. Just becasue SFP1 isn't my cup of tea today doesn't mean I'm going to ignore it or my own hopes for the future.

Could just be me but I don't think TK wants the hassle of building a hardcore sim. It's taken him years to get where he is now with his "causal light sim" (understandably). I think he's doing what he enjoys and although I'll probably wish WOE had a little more substance when it comes out, I'm still loving his easy to learn, play and tweak sims.

The biggest SF draw for me is the sheer number of flyables which can never be hardcore with this type of mega-survey sim, right?
--


Mark

FlyXwire,
Strike 6, you're out.

To get this thread back on target, so to speak, I'm with a lot of you. Working MFDs are nice, but not necessary simply because this is why the game appeals to me. It doesn't require me to invest a whole lot of time and effort in button-pushing. All it wants me to do is fly.

I like this for several reasons. I've got kids I like spending time with and spooling up a mission after they're out for the night and the wife's casting jewelry upstairs is just the thing for me to unwind.

What about you guys? What's more important to you? Weapons modeling and diversity of aircraft or cockpit fidelity?

pfunk

PFunk, I mentioned this in another thread but MFDs don't necessarily make a sim complex.

JetFighter IV (MUCH lighter than SF) has 2, 3 or 4 MFDs depending on a/c (F-14, F/A-18 or F-22) with each MFD sharing the same 6 or so screens. That is, F3 cycles the screens on the first MFD, F4 the second MFD, and so on. Not realistic and very generic and simplified, but at least you get multiple MFDs displaying different screens in a VERY light flight sim.

And even semi-hardcore sims don't need clickable MFDs IMO (i.e. Hornet Korea).

So I think we can have MFDs and still have a casual light flight sim (i.e. Novalogic's F-16 MRF).
--


Mark

I'll vote for weapons modelling and diversity of Aircraft, thanks. We like the game for the same reason Pfunk. When the house settles down, we can rattle off a mission or two without having to devote an hour to getting the aircraft in the air. Funny thing is...I wonder if real pilots look at flight sims requiring start-up procedures and check lists and scratch their heads and wonder why?

This is what appealed to me about Jane's USAF, which has working button-pushing MFDs and IMO is still a light casual flight sim. I don't expect SF to be as complex as USAF anytime soon but I hope eventually it comes close.
--


Mark