# Check this out:SWON



## Birdmanwest (Feb 17, 2004)

Secret Weapons Over Normandy is the best airplane game out there for a WW2 aircraft fans like us. 
http://www.lucasarts.com/products/normandy/


----------



## Crazy (Feb 17, 2004)

SWON is a good game, bit to arcady for my likes. 

I must beg to differ on the "best airplane game out there" point.

IL-2 Sturmovik FB is the best game for the likes of us out, there, until of course the Aces Expansion Pack for it comes out 8)


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Feb 17, 2004)

fb is the best for sure


----------



## Hot Space (Feb 17, 2004)

It looks ok I guess  

Hot Space


----------



## Birdmanwest (Feb 18, 2004)

Well I never heared of FB before and I guess thats the best game. But I think what I was trying to mean was in ps2 and xbox. If the FB is out there on xbox then that is best for sure.


----------



## nutter (Feb 18, 2004)

FB will never come out for anything other than the p.c. ps2 and xbox wouldn't be able to handle it.

that secret weapons games got a lot of flyable planes but the graphucs looked a bit cheap to me so i won't be buying it. still nice to see some competition


----------



## Archer (Feb 18, 2004)

I like CFS2 since its in the Pacific. Can't wait to see the Pacific sim based on the IL-2/FB engine ...think its supposed to be out around Christmas maybe


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Feb 19, 2004)

i dont like msoft sims because u have to pick what ordanance u want unlike il2 where there is a rocket a bomb a mg and a cannon button and the flight model is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay crappy compared to il2 graphics too sure cfs3 has better gfx but thats cuz its only a couple months old the original il2 is over two years old and the graphics still kick ass! fb is even better plus lets not forget the damage model we all love so much


----------



## Crazy (Feb 21, 2004)

GermansRGeniuses said:


> i dont like msoft sims because u have to pick what ordanance u want unlike il2 where there is a rocket a bomb a mg and a cannon button and the flight model is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay crappy compared to il2 graphics too sure cfs3 has better gfx but thats cuz its only a couple months old the original il2 is over two years old and the graphics still kick ass! fb is even better plus lets not forget the damage model we all love so much





Ahhh, the oh so familiar damage model


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 21, 2004)

nutter said:


> FB will never come out for anything other than the p.c. ps2 and xbox wouldn't be able to handle it.
> 
> that secret weapons games got a lot of flyable planes but the graphucs looked a bit cheap to me so i won't be buying it. still nice to see some competition



1) the X-Box has 3 time the graphics power of the P.S.2 (in theory), making it more powerfull

2) i heard the game was pretty bad to


----------



## nutter (Feb 24, 2004)

its not just the graphics power its the procesor speed as well. also the x-box will never be use to its full potential 

and flight sims don't sell well on consoles thats why there on the pc because it wouldn't be worth the money to develop it for the xbox

i had a look at the games website looks like some daft idea where your in some special squadron that flys all over


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 24, 2004)

lol it doesnt lanc, the ps2 is a much better console 8) ive yet to see an xbox game with graphics i can compare to the ps2 

and btw woooo this is my 200th post


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 24, 2004)

200 *cough* that's nothing *cough*


----------



## Archer (Feb 24, 2004)

GermansRGeniuses said:


> i dont like msoft sims because u have to pick what ordanance u want unlike il2 where there is a rocket a bomb a mg and a cannon button


Personally I like cycling through weapons somewhat because its more along the lines of arming it than just firing it off.



> the flight model is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay crappy compared to il2


Yes, the stock flight model is a bunch of BS, but the avhistory.org planes are fun to fly.



> graphics too sure cfs3 has better gfx but thats cuz its only a couple months old the original il2 is over two years old and the graphics still kick ass!


IL-2 definately has the graphics over CFS2, but if the graphics are okay thats fine by me. My opinion of CFS3 is that its pretty horrible. I only played IL-2 once, and I wasn't too impressed with the flight model (I took off and climbed a few thousand feet before deciding the graphics that it was set on sucked and didn't feel like changing them). From the shots of FB though, the graphics are great (especially the effects).

For me though, IL-2 isn't set in the Pacific theater, it doesn't have carriers, it doesn't have accurate terrain, it doesn't have Corsairs, it doesn't have SBDs, it doesn't have Avengers, it doesn't have Hellcats, it doesn't have Vals, it doesn't have Kates (AFAIK, I think it has Zeroes..but what variants?), and add-on planes, scenery, etc cannot be made (IIRC Maddox has to like them and release them in/as a patch).

Great sim for anyone wanting to fly in Eastern Europe or for the visuals, but for IMO (for me and my personal preferences) it isn't any good 

Does IL-2 FB have nukes, tanks, choppers, or artillery that the player can use?


----------



## Crazy (Feb 24, 2004)

Archer,

IL-2 doesn't support add-ons because it would make online flight almost impossible, with everyone having slighty different plane sets than the next guy

If you're looking for artillery and tanks for sceney and realistic tank-battles with air cover, IL-2 has you covered 8) If you actually want to control them, may I suggest Battlefield 1942?  

IL-2 also includes this neat feature called the FMB (Full mission builder) where the versatility is tremendous. There are an abundance of missions, because one doesn't have to be a genius to work it. Example? I have several missions   

All in all, IL-2 is the best flight sim out there. (And that;s only slightly baised  )


----------



## nutter (Feb 25, 2004)

> So, finally we have 112 flyables in FB + AEP.
> We did for all "missed" in the past important flyable aircraft the complex damage model.
> And we have over 150 aircraft in total...


from oleg

thats why fb is easily the best flight sim by miles


----------



## Hot Space (Feb 25, 2004)

I walked miles once  

Hot Space


----------



## Anonymous (Feb 25, 2004)

Give me good old "Aces over Europe" or "Aces of the Pacific" by Sierra any day! I even keep an old Pentium 1 around that can run AOTP (not AOE though, GRR!!)

-- Chris


----------



## Archer (Feb 26, 2004)

> IL-2 doesn't support add-ons because it would make online flight almost impossible, with everyone having slighty different plane sets than the next guy.


As much as I don't like CFS3, it supports add-on aircraft and checks them for online play (too much IMO, since you can't change your gun convergence range and play online if others dont have the same change).



> If you're looking for artillery and tanks for sceney and realistic tank-battles with air cover, IL-2 has you covered If you actually want to control them, may I suggest Battlefield 1942?


I don't actually want to use them, but its nice to know you can "fly" a tank, ship, or artillery in CFS2. It's nice that FB has actual tank battles (**** (_oops_) it, I almost want to buy FB to watch the tank battles  ). CFS2 doesn't have tank battles/naval bombardments which sorta sucks.



> IL-2 also includes this neat feature called the FMB (Full mission builder) where the versatility is tremendous. There are an abundance of missions, because one doesn't have to be a genius to work it.


What can it do? CFS2 has a great mission builder that I personally find easy to use (and if I ever both to learn the keystrokes it'll be better) but due to CFS2's halfassed online play complex missions are generally for SP.



> All in all, IL-2 is the best flight sim out there. (And that;s only slightly baised)


Yup, it has all sorts of features that are great - IMO the best are MP ordnance, ground units fighting, etc - but like all games it has some bad things about it too. Sadly MS left some blatantly obvious MP features out of CFS2 that make it not nearly as good as it could be. But I still can't say IL-2 FB is more than okay, since it ain't the PTO 

Can you play IL-2 FB on dial-up connection without much lag? Or does it require high speed internet?


----------



## aussie jim (Feb 26, 2004)

EAW now has over 350 plus flyable planes...pacific/russian/midway/New Guinea/BoB/ETO and Spanish theatres..all with correct terrains ,planes missions etc . and will run on Pcs that wont handle FB (this is no way a rag at FB) EAW just has that certain feel about it and now with Februarys release of new Flight and damage models the game has improved dramatically. I love the fact on my pc i can have 120 b17s/Lancs/B24s/He111s in the air at once with over 50 fighters and still get good frame rates..all in hi res . Carriers are nearly ready and the whole midway scene is hopefully being upgraded as is the Desert Air War scenario.

Some of you guys should pop into simHQ in the EAW forum and check it out (its not as awesome looking as FB -the detail on the planes i mean) but its pretty damn kick ass these days 8) and we do have our own dedicated server for online done by one of the EAW crew.

Sorry for the rant but i just love EAW


----------



## Archer (Feb 27, 2004)

Sounds interesting...but I'm already pressed for time  Nonetheless, I may be "forced" to get it and spend countless hours flying


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 27, 2004)

i have a game on the ps2 called sky oddysey, that has ww2 planes in it  (a pathetic attempt to fit in)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 29, 2004)

to right................


----------



## Crazy (Feb 29, 2004)

Archer said:


> Can you play IL-2 FB on dial-up connection without much lag? Or does it require high speed internet?




It's best to have a high-speed internet connection, but then, it usually is. From what I hear, the dial-up boys don't have terrible lag problems. It depends more on the server as to the lag you'll get


----------



## Hot Space (Feb 29, 2004)

I think anyone would be lost without it, and I'm just talking Mods  

Hot Space


----------



## aussie jim (Feb 29, 2004)

Ok so can we have a trade off here...ill burn up a bunch of EAW cds and send them out to whoever wants one if i can get my hands on an FB cd  ..or is that frowned upon?  

cheers


----------



## Archer (Feb 29, 2004)

...


----------



## Archer (Feb 29, 2004)

FB's only $20 Canadian - already as cheap as CFS2, thats gotta say something about quality  

Do you need to pay a monthly fee for EAW? Or is it a good flight sim that you just "pay" for once?


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Feb 29, 2004)

no it has nothing to do with quality and ill burn il2 original =P but no deal on fb (the original isnt nearly as good)


----------



## aussie jim (Mar 1, 2004)

> Do you need to pay a monthly fee for EAW? Or is it a good flight sim that you just "pay" for once?


 you get EAW once and then all of the mods are made by the EAW community and downloadable ..so basically what you want..you get for free 8) 

check here for an insight into some of the work...The site is called Tallyho  http://www.cds1.net/~linkman993/

Thanks German for the offer but im really looking for FB


----------



## Crazy (Mar 1, 2004)

gonna need a copy of the original to run FB, m8 8)


----------



## aussie jim (Mar 2, 2004)

Arghh dammit  ..the cheapest i have seen it here in Brisbane is 85 dollars for the pack of two..i spose if i get it i can get some help frrom you guys to get up and running..errr..flying


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Mar 2, 2004)

well not really u can just buy it off an american website... itd prolly be cheaper by a bit considering i got mine for $20


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 6, 2004)

how much in pounds is 85 dollars?


----------

