With the level bombing thing I think you'll find that thats how it was done in reality. The whole formation would drop there bombs when they saw there leader lay his eggs. If you find the Campaigns too easy then increase the difficulty and realism. The lack of enemy aircraft is explainable. If you are winning the campaign then the enemy airforce will be pretty much run into the ground. And if you do see enemy aircraft when your in a bomber then I hope that the enemy don't see me cause if they do then your dead. Your problem with the speed indicator might be a glitch in your program or it might not be. But then I rarely fly those B25's because the guns in the nose have no method of aiming.

May I just add that while IL2 might seem a much better game they failed to give it the gameplay of the CFS series. Combat Flight Sim has so much more potential than IL2 mainly because the range of addons is so much more vast. I have had IL2 for over a year now and I havn't seen 1 3rd party plane avaliable for download. CFS3 has been out for months and already 3rd party aircraft are being released along with a vast range of other addons. Also IL2 looses realism in the way that you can blow up a 6 engined bomber with 3 cannon shells at a range of 4 miles. THAT IS NOT REALISTIC!

Rest assured there will be more patches for CFS3. It took M$ 3 patches to get FS2000 correct. Just realise that M$ have turned to a whole new graphics engine for this game which means that there going to have some initial problems. I realise that M$ were to hastey on releasing the game in time for the christmas market and for that there probably kicking themselves. Most people here including me have tried both CFS3 and IL2 and we all continue with M$'s program because its so much more enjoyable. Don't just throw CFS3 away because of a lack of enemy aircraft in the campaign (remember the game is based on GROUND ATTACK and so enemy aircraft are not part of the game. If you want enemy aircraft then do a CAP mission or an intercept.) and because the AI in the bombers are more realistic. I found it really annoying that they would go and dive bomb a target before. Then they died cause they couldn't pull up. It's realism not M$ making a mess of it.

Just remember that CFS4 is very likely to be set in the pacific theater from 1943 onwards (the bit they missed in CFS2).

So there you go. I have had my problems with CFS3 and have fixed them. If you have problems then post them here and someone will try to eliminate the problem.

Remember CFS3 is a big step forwards for M$ and in a few years time CFS will leave IL2 and every other WWII combat sim for dust.

As I remember CFS1's campaign was very easy also, but when third party developers started putting out missions and campaigns, like the piilot war series, you had to constantly scramble to survive. Microsoft, with the generic campaign that came with the sim, just built a platform for third party people to build on and I believe that CFS3 will be even better in time. There are already some pretty intense missions out there to download including a couple of add ons from Microsoft.
When the scenery and terrain sdk comes out in a few months we will see this sim develop into what it really is, the best combat flight sim to date.  I am sorry to hear that so many people are having so many problems after the patch. I have a low end machine and although the patch didn"t improve my framerates, the sim flies a lot smoother than it did before, even after putting the add on aircraft and Ghostponies effects back in.  This week I am finally going to upgrade my mem ffrom 256 to 512 and I believe this will give me all the performance I want.  I have seen some other posts like this one on other sites and I hope these people don't give up on CFS3 even though it can be a pain in the butt to set up on any given machine, because in a few months I think it will improve immensly.

il2 forgotten battles is a standalone ww2 simm, not an add on.
The campaign i'm currently playing is for the lufftwaffe using the ju88 a4 as i said in my 1st post today.
in my last mission i ordered my flight to bomb the railyard which was the target for the mission, and for 20 minutes i circled around the area waiting for them to do so, this was in suffolk possibly nr ipswich, and as you probably know there was a heavy concentration of airbases around there, as there is in cfs3, without a single enemy fighter coming up to intercept!

after 20 mins i gave up on my flight who had refused to attack the target, and did it myself.
being intercepted was part of a bomber pilots "life" (for want of a better phrase) so why should'nt it have a bigger part in cfs3?, i'm not some kind of nut who only gets off on playing games at the hardest level, but some sort of opposition to bombers would  make it more interesting and raise the realism.
after all what is printed at the bottom of the cfs3 box?
"As Real As It Gets!" and at the moment cfs3 is not.

forgotten battles is STANDALONE simm.

belgium to suffolk is approx 125 miles - no fighters.
yes of course fighters were a hazard to bombers, and if you recall i said "life for want of a better phrase"
the point here is that if this sim is to be as real as it gets then there should be more interceptions. to answer a point in your previous post, at the moment the allies hold paris and the rest of north east france, so you could say i'm loosing at the moment. taking il2 as an example again, fighters appeared in almost every mission but they do not automaticaly shoot you down, ie you can evade or shoot back, this does not make it any less playable, in fact the opposite is true!
so why should cfs3 be different? should anything that is difficult be left out?

Several days ago after installing the patch, I flew a bombing mission. When I reached the target I ordered all my wingmen to attack it. They flew nice and level and when I got over the target I dropped my bombs followed by my wingmen dropping theirs, but I accidentally missed the target. Guess what, all of my wingmen successfully hit and destroyed the target and the mission was a total success

Let me settle this fighter thing.

Who's read 'Bomber' by Len Deighton?  If you have you will notice that it says that crewmen rarely ever saw fighters!
You're group will be part of a huge bomber stream in the game.  The stream is so wide and long that is likely that you'll never see any friendly aircraft.  You have to look at that way and then ask yourself where the fighters are...they're attacing the damn bombers that arrived before you.

As for them all dropping there bombs and missing...tell them to attack, give them a few minutes because they do it all by the book (as they did before the bloody patch) so it takes them longer than you.  Once they've all got rid of there load, then you finish the taget off or destroy a nearby installation.

One thing that's wrong though...B-24s were used by the RAF for anti-shipping and submarine attacks, while the other bombers performed night raids only.  But since there is no way to have a Mossie fly before and mark the target, this can be forgiven.

Thank you...I'm off to get the No CD 3.1 and pound the Huns into submission.

yes dad

I'm sure that woodlouse would agree that this is only a difference of opion and not any sort of personal attack on each other

Ozzy. This is a debate in which no screaming has yet taken place so why threaten us with a key?

Flasheart, the medium bombers were included because in the last few years of the war medium bombers were used for pinpoint attacks of transportation links and other tactical targets.

And whitey. Even though I got bored of bomber I do know that it was only 1 raid so can you please explain how the rarley saw fighters? I know the main reason is because the nightfighters came from below and had upward firing guns etc. to avoid getting in the bombers field of fire.

I do realise that being in a bomber stream of well over 1000 aircraft would put the chances of being seen down to very small odds. Also is it that the bombers rarely saw the fighters or the other way round or both?

Naa... On second thoughts is would be the Bombers not seeing the fighters...

The german night fighter defences had Ground radar, radios and aircraft radar to help them find the bomber stream...

For your first question I don't know. But thats how it was done in the war so i'm happy.

the bomber was that 6 engined Me626? That big bugger. The fighter I think was a Lagg3 or Me109 I can't remember. Just remember that you gotta get the deflection just right but when your sure you can hit it fire a very short burst and see what happens. For me the enemy aircraft blew up completly. good luck.

G'day Whitey,

I haven't seen you for what seems ages.

Hope yopur well and happy.  See ya round like a rissole.

Quote:


Ahh these language differences!!

I thought it was a word that was known in the UK, but I must be mistaken.

It's a meat pattie, hamburger, round peice of minced beef.

ie: "See ya 'round like a rissole."
same as: "Off like a brides nightie"

Okay guys, well I've deleted my offending post, and would like to apologise to you. I just had these horrible visions on another war breaking out between the respective camps on CFS3. A case of leaping before I looked if you know what I mean....
Didn't mean to offend anyone, so I'll go and flog myself now with some birch twigs or something as penance. 
Sorry, didn't mean to upset anyone or overstep the mark.

Mark (a chastened moderator)

luck exists in the real world as well as combat sims.
if a cannon shell explodes on impact, then 1, 2 or even 3 hits to a fuel tank, for example, would ignite  the fuel causing an explosion and bring down the plane, (in lots of pieces usualy).

and dont forget that the p39, lagg3t, me109g had  a large calibre cannon availiable (37mm, 45mm, 30mm respectively) that would do a lot more damage than the 20mm cannon of p38's or spitfires for example, which is why you cant do it in cfs3.

try it with p39 in cfs2, if you've made it flyable, it works there too, so it must have benn possible...right?

just one more thing have you read the testimonials on the 1st page of the il2 manual?

if you look back at my previous post you'll see that i never said the 109 had a 45mm cannon, it was the lagg3t
as for highly unrealistic i thaught i explained that aswell.

well that's it, i've said more than i wanted to, more than once, and i refuse to be drawn any further into a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent

Quote:


When you say "respective camps on CFS3" I presume you mean the ones who think it's has been pretty much a failure in many areas and the ones who live on another planet.

Please, before I am howled down. j/k j/k j/k j/k j/k 

I know what you mean Ozzy.

Sharon likes the aspect of me not being "under foot".

We solved the "remote" problem years ago, I have the TV in the loungeroom and she has the one in the bedroom. She has the dvd connected to hers and i have the vcr on mine and we both have Foxtel cable.

The only thing we have to share is HER P.C.

Gees we are all geared up for some real solid watchin', aren't we? 

Medium Bombers, especially the B-26, rarely flew in "bomber streams" that was a British Heavy tactic.  Marauders flew low and fast to knock out specific point targets, Bridges, power plants, etc,  They loved moonlit nights  which the Germans referred to as "Marauder  weather".

I am truly disappointed in CFS-3 because it is so lacking in historical reality.  It is more of a "crimson skies" format rather than historical.  There are so many anti-shipping missions that you would think you were campaigning against the US or GB rather than Germany.  Also single engine fighter bombers were rarely used on anti-shipping missions.In 1943 Fighter Bomber definetly were not attacking industrial targets that was a job for the heavies.  In the RAF the Bristol Beaufighter was the designated ship-killer until the advent of the DH  mosquito when it  had to share the effort with this great plane. You (the player) are restricted to flying the P-47D "Razorback" in all USAF campaigns but can fly the later model P-47D with the bubble canopy in single combat missions. The gunsight on the P-47D has a structural member running through the center of the gunsight making it extremely hard to hit your target.  Also the perfromance parameters of the P-47D are all wrong, the aircraft flies like the "proverbial ruptured duck" at altitude exceeding 5-8ooo feet  when , in fact, it was the best performing fighter the US had at altitute.
They  (MS)  has the P-47D carrying 1,000 lb bombs in 1942  something the aircraft was not fitted for until 1944. The P-47 fighter pilots association website has some really interesting information concerning this aircraft from the pilots who flew them in combat.  The aircraft performed much better than MS allows it to perform in their game.

Also American tracer ammunition is red not silver. green, or white but RED.  on the other hand Germ  and Russian (later Soviet Bloc) used silver/green tracers.  This is a small thing but MS should get it right  if they are going to produce a Combat Flight Simulator.

I have one more comment reference to combat damage.  I can get on an opponents six and fire my whole "basic load" of ammjunition into him and see hits, parts flying off, etc, and he still doeasn't go down.  However, an opponent can ( very rarely, of course) get on my six  fire a two second burst and utterly devastate my plane, kill me  and RTB. Also German Bombers were mainly armed with Rifle caliber machine guns yet I have been shot down from 1-1500 yards -- I don't think a Rifle caliber MG (7.9mm) could do this much damage to a P-47 from that Range or for that matter closer ranges. 

I have so many complaints but I wont take up anymore of your time except to say ; CFS-3 SUCKS!

Quote:


I'm real sorry mate. If your situation was to hit me, I would be a candidate for the funny farm. Just so I could get the use of their TV facilities.................lol.

Seriously, because I'm not all that mobile, I probably tend to be too much of a TV/ Movie addict, but I suppose there are worse things. I do learn alot from the Movies and doco's and specials.

Saw a History Channel Doco on the WWII DUKW. You wouldn't think an hour about a floating truck would be interesting, but I was rivetted.   

I think there are so many shipping missions at the beginning of the campaign as its meant to be Germany is preparing for Operation Sealion. So logically that is correct. Personally I quite enjoy them, although my bombing skills in a Spit still need some work

Ozzy

that makes complete sense, i'm glad i'm not alone in thinking this way about cfs3

Sherman,

I'm no officionado when it comes to CFS3. I haven't had oportunity to spend more than 20 hours actually playing the game but I think, aside from the obvious performance problems and complaints, there is also an inherent lack of research having been done on the part of M$. All part of an obvious rush to get it out. WHY!?

As for some of the AI planes in CFS2 performing and maneuvring way past their historical capabilities, this has been a very often reported/berated problem with the Sim, particularly in these forums.
As for the Betty, it does seem to be a particularly vicious little piece of work in CFS2. I have learnt that historically that they were not a difficult plane to drop at all, but in the Sim, if you go within 500 or 600 yards you get shot to pieces.
But still, for what my opinion is worth, CFS2 is a far better game from a performance and historical point of view. At present, anyway. 

Brensec:

Roger, that CFS 2 is definetly superior to CFS 3 as far as interesting and historically correct  missions.  I have flown the F4F Wildcat and had it perform much better than the P47D even tho the latter had a 2,000 HP engine, etc.  For example I have had up a 400MPH head of steam on the P47D make a  turn  with a standard rate of turn only to have the speed bleed off to a mere 100MPH  at the completion of the turn.

They (MS) have the Medals , Decorations and citations all wrong.  In the USAAF the Highest combat (valor) decoration was the MOH (sometimes called the Congressional MOH), Next was the Distinguished Service Cross, Silver Star, Bronze Star and Distinguished Flying Cross.  The Legion of Merit was (and is) a medal awarded for service or merit. It is usually awarded to Rear echelon  ( Most commonly referred to as REMF's by the combat troops)  Field Grade Officers. The Legion of Merit was also awarded to enlisted men but it was a rare event indeed.  I can think of no reason why a combat  pilot would receive a letter of commendation for achieving five aerial victories a LOC in this case would have really "P----d" me off.  MS awards the Legion of Merit for "Gallantry and Intrepidity Above and Beyond the Call of Duty" this is the wording for citations awarding the MOH.

In order of Precedence  US Combat Awards are:

1.  MOH :  Awarded for Gallantry and intrepidity above and beyond the call of duty.

2.  DFC :  Awarded for Conspicuous valor & Gallantry in action

3.  Silver Star: Awarded for Gallantry in Action

4.Bronze Star:  Heroism in Action (since WWII the BS has also been awarded for service /merit. So a Bronze "V"
                                                     device was added to the medal to denote a combat  award).
5. Distinguished Flying Cross:  Although awarded for combat could also be awarded  (and still is) during peace time.

It is really suprising to me that they (MS) did such poor research while developing this game.  I talked with one of their support personnel who was a F-4 E Phantom Pilot  and if they had just asked could have given them first hand information.

Well it is it is just $39.95 + shipping down the drain, as far as I am concerned.


Batman sends.


4.

The P-55 and P-80 are not post war planes...the P-55 was part of the experimental anti-bomber series and the lineage of the P-80 is obvious.

The fact that P-80's were deployed to Italy for combat evaluations should effectively end any speculation about the P-80 being a post war plane.

sherman

the 1st flight of the p55 (then xp55) took place immediatley after its completion on july 13 1943.
and the p80 on january 9 1944, so development was started during the war, even if they had'nt entered service, but as cfs3 can run into 1946 they have good reason to be included as they could have entered service by that time.

I think the p80 did enter service around then and the p55 might have with more development

you're right, neither aircraft saw combat during ww2, but that stopped in 1945, as cfs3 goes into 1946 there is a good reason to include them in the game as a "what if" scenario, that goes for the vampire and, i think, also the go229

Sailor Malan?

Well the P-80 I can accept in a "what if" scenario but the XP-55 could not fly worth a damn and in my opinion should never have been included in the game.  On the British side the  Gloster Meteor (which may have flown missions in WWII) is not included and should have been.  The Brits had an operational Squadron equipped with the Meteor in 1945 before the war ended.

I am still upset with microsoft for making me believe the game would be historically accurate only to find it nothing but a fantasy.  I was looking forward to missions in  the Med., North Africa, Italy, etc.

In the game I am now up to October 1945 and have nearly reconquered Continental Europe.  My front line stretches from Norway to Cherbourg and I have liberated all the ports in this area.  However, I still find the English Channel full of German warships, commercial shipping, and all the attendant flak.  In real life what would these ships have to do?  They have no friendly ports open to them and in all probablity they could do nothing but surrender to the nearest Allied Port of warship or scuttle themselves. 

The game is screwed up but I am still playing waiting to see how the war ends.  ho knows, I may have to brush up on my German.

sherman for president! 

i agree with you totaly sherman, cfs3 is not an accurate simm, and was dissapointed with the lack of meteors.
but i dont have a problem with the p55 being included, sure the real one was pants, but perhaps with more development it might have been quite a good fighter, who knows?
the same goes for the gotha i dont think that got past the prototype stage either, but i'm ok with that plane in the game.
we could list a lot of better prototypes that did'nt enter service and planes that entered service in45/46 that should have been included, but at the end of the day some have to be left out, dont they?
i'm sure that soon there'll be planes that we all would like to have been included available as freeware (i've already got my meteor)

also has anyone noticed v1 rocket launch ramps along the french coast in 1943 in game?
a whole year or more before they actualy appeared?

Quote:


Does anyone know if the Sim program would allow for "Patton" to follow through and kick Russian butt?..........lol 
Obviously there would have to be Russian targets and aircraft (which there aren't) but would it be possible to add-on these things and have the war continue into Russia (as some people, at the time, thought it should have)?

In fact, the more I think of it, that's probably one of the most plausible "what if's" there could be. 

But I did find this

Quote:

Sorry Sherman - a lot of times discussions are misunderstood due to the lack of voice inflection in written communications. I am not trying to win anything either - just a friendly discussion. I thought most here were interested in realism so I was just throwing in a little tidbit to help. Sorry if I offended.

I am new here and none know me yet. You will find that I am very light hearted and take little too seriously except for politics. Which I rarely discuss.

Besides - I am aware that I could possibly be wrong. I throw something out - someone counters - if it is correct - I learn something.

BTW - I made it till December last year before I made a mistake. 

Didn't say I was wrong just said I didn't want to ruffle feathers.