streakeagle

TK explained a long time ago why replay wasn't practical with his game engine. It involves deterministic versus non-deterministic programming. In a conventional deterministic program, if you start in the exact same point and feed exactly the same inputs to the program, you get exactly the same results. TK's engine is non-deterministic, every time you play you get different results even if you give it the same exact control inputs. So, for a replay program to work, it would have to record everything that is happening in the game down to the individual bullets being fired by M61 gatling guns at a very fast time interval. Now, I know it can be done because Aces High 2 appears to track everything even when you are flying in an arena with 400 other people plus AI flak and ships, but TK has stated he cannot do it. So, I don't think it is even on his list at all. The closest you can come to replay is to run fraps to record the video you are seeing. Obviously, this doesn't allow you to jump around and analyze what happened, but it is all you have.

I applaud his effort, and maybe it will have some impact. But if you are Bin Laden and hate the West, why are you going to care about what anyone thinks when you are certain that you are fighting Satan for Allah. It is refreshing to see someone with his background express such a level-headed point of view. Though, like Anwar El Sadat, it seems he arrived at this viewpoint through military defeat. There have been plenty of Muslim moderates transformed into terrorist extremists, but this is the only time I have seen one of the extremists transition to being a peace-seeking moderate. Even if his letter has little impact, his own transition gives me hope that this doesn't have to be an endless war the way Israel and the Arabs have been fighting for centuries. Maybe one day in the not so distant future, the extremists will become like Nazis: small fringe groups that don't have the money or power to do much more than fight amongst themselves and seen as unacceptable embarrassments by everyone else in the world.

I am a long time veteran of the series. I have owned every version of this game since the original Walmart Strategy First release of SFP1. Up to the 083006 patch level, the best AI dogfighters were in SP2a. They could actually aim and hit with short bursts of their guns. WoV introduced carriers, but killed AI effectiveness and broke many flight models. Enemy AI could barely hit anything and friendly AI was pretty much defenseless. By 083006, the AI was still short of the effectiveness seen in SP2a. WoI reintroduced AI that was aggressive and accurate. Friendly AI is still somewhat ineffective if you use HARD settings which bumps up enemy AI's likelyhood of having proficient pilots and gives friendly AI a higher probability of novices. Now for the direct answer to your question: SF2 AI out of the box is capable of shooting me down. Most of the time, they don't come close to flying like aces, but they can and do get behind me and shoot me down. AI is currently on par or better than SFP1 SP2a in air-to-air dogfighting. I have had MiG-21s using early AA-2 Atolls hit me. This almost never happened in SP2a and absolutley never happened to me in WoV or WoE at the 083006 patch level. However, I can still engage and beat MiG-17s while flying F-100s, F-105s, and F-4s with relative "ease" if I am free to use external views (like player to target) to maintain perfect situational awareness. Part of that is my level of experience. Part of that is that the AI still plays a mostly 2d turn-n-burn game that is predictable and therefore defeatable even in lead sleds like the F-105. I use the word "ease" in quotes because I have seen posts from plenty of people that have great trouble turn fighting MiGs in heavy US fighters. Even if you restrict me to 2d turn fighting, the MiG-17 can be beaten using aggressive scissors. Whereas, when a human pilot in multiplayer flies a MiG-17 against another human player, the only chance the heavy fighter has is if it has superior acceleration and climb to control the engagement, otherwise, the MiG-17 will eat you alive. So, even at its best, the AI doesn't come close to a skilled human player like doghouse, but the AI in SF2 is better than a lot of the people I met when I hosted SFP1/Wov/WoE/WoI online. One more reference: I posted and SF2V mission at Third Wire with four loaded F-105s getting jumped from behind by four MiG-17s. I had to set both the enemy and friendly AI to max skill to even get close to historical results, otherwise, I could clear the skies of MiG-17s and take no losses every single time. With the mission as released, if I stick to using the in-cockpit view with TrackIR (no padlocks or <T> key, etc.), the results vary each time I play, but come pretty close to reality. Now, jump into SF2I with the expansion pack and fly P-51Ds versus Spitfires. Neither side has the vertical performance of an F-104, F-4, or F-15. This is perfect for the AI's turn fighting skills. If you do not personally cut down the number of Spitfires quickly, they will eat the P-51Ds alive. But, as in F-4 vs MiG-17 fights, with a lot of practice, you can get to where the Spitfires are killable. I much prefer multiplayer, but this sim never supported multiplayer that well and the community was always pretty small. Now SF2 doesn't even have multiplayer and I am not really interested in giving up any of the refinements in SF2 to play multiplayer in SF1.

I had returned from naval service in 1997 and went back to the University of South Florida in January of 2000 to finish the degreed I had started in 1987. So there I was in the "fishbowl" where all the engineering students hung out and studied between classes. People in the nearby computer lab could no longer get through on the internet, as it was choked with traffic. So I mostly got 2nd hand verbal information. I was in a state of disbelief and didn't really come to grips with what had happened until I got home and saw everything on TV. While the President's initial response upon being informed wasn't the one I would want from the man leading this country, I fully understand it: utter shock and disbelief. He was literally stunned. <S> to Flight 93! In a no-win situation on the worst day in recent US history, they managed a victory. That one aircraft could have made an already bad day quite a bit worse.

I am not aware of an electronic copy. Mine is worn out and yellowing from all the years of reading it, tracing diagrams, and traveling in the Navy. It is probably the oldest aviation document I have in my collection as I received it as a gift from a Tampa Police Department radio dispatcher. In return, I gave her a posterboard T-38 replica about 2 1/2 feet long that I made using the profiles in this magazine. A few years ago, I got a Thunderbird book that has a lot more history and color photos, but none of the aircraft profiles. I lack similar documentation on the Blue Angels.

For me, the Korean War mod for SFP1 SP2a was always my favorite. This SF2 version is absolutely stunning. If it works as well as it looks, this team should seriously consider going "payware". Maybe the business model could be $1 per mission in 10 mission packs that come with all mods required to run the 10 missions? Wait, someone else is already abusing that model :P At a minimum, a small token $10 or $20 fee could be charged and used to pay for the CombatAce bandwidth to distribute it. Or maybe combined with a renewal of a full CombatAce subsription? This kind of work deserves monetary compensation of some sort (as does many of the best modders here - think Mirage Factory).

Whatever path TK takes, I am sure I will get more planes I want. I just hope TK finds a path that keeps him in business so that we keep getting more from him.

Games permitting players to be NAZIs are prolific. But no one has a problem with that. What about games where VC are user playable, i.e. Battlefield Vietnam? Obviously, the difference is time. As long as you wait 20 years or more after hostilities have ceased, it is no longer offensive to release a game where players can pretend to be US enemies and kill US troops per historical reality. The kind of logic that requires removing that game from store shelves is the kind of logic that requires censoring tv, movies, and books. I have no interest in playing games like Grand Theft Auto series, so I simply choose not to buy it. Do bases permit selling GTA? I personally find that more offensive than any tactical first person shooter. I wouldn't ban any games. Is a game any different than a book? I see it as a free speech issue.

Just finished several of the stock single player missions in Operation Arrowhead. They completely capture the best aspects of the original OFP and then add a whole bunch more: Screaming women and other innocent people that should not be shot. Classic shoot/don't shoot style gameplay. Goats. Sniper rifle with thermal imaging scope and selectable zoom. Almost cinematic quality graphics. I still have some issues due to my weak single core processor, but the ArmA2 series is simply amazing after so many years of playing OFP/Resistance.

The "little bird" with rockets and miniguns is a blast, too. Functionally, it is identical to my favorite UH-1 gunship configuration except that it is more agile. I know the helicopter flight models are as bad as any of the other vehicles in the game, but not having any other combat flight simulator that allows me to fly AH-1s, UH-1s, AH-64s, etc. has forced me to adapt to this implementation. In all other aspects it is immersive enough to make me forget about the flight models. Whereas as with aircraft, there are so many other sims available that do it much better that I can't force myself to become proficient with ArmA 2's flight models. If the DCS series ever decides to model a UH-1 or AH-1, I might finally get a decent alternative, but in the mean time, OFP/ArmA 2 remains my favorite for flying combat helo missions.

I found that there is a semi-finished "Project '85" mod that has unit and vehicle packs covering a lot of what I want. However, they were started in 2007 and have not been fully brought up to ArmA2 standards. The modder has moved on, so it is all "as is". Not sure if I am going to mess with mods at all. I haven't even begun to finish all of the stock missions.

I just got British Armed Forces. Steam has everything all patched up to current revision, so I used the optional "Combined Operations" startup to have everything available in one installation: ArmA2, Operation Arrowhead, and British Armed Forces. The only reason I would want mods is for older time frames. I really like the original game's 1985 time frame and the other mods I focused on were the Vietnam era mods, which were assembled into one awesome package. But out of the box, I get an old UH-1 with a single engine and door guns, which is pretty cool. I can't stand flying the jets. Horrible flight modeling/playability. However, I still thoroughly enjoy all of the helos and the various types of missions that can be flown with them. The ability to have more than one weapon manned per vehicle has been a great thing. That was one of the more annoying parts of OFP. Now, when can we start clubbing people with rifles? Fix bayonets? Or simply come up from behind and slit a throat? I am not talking about custom user scripts, I want out of the box functionality. First aid and dragging troops is pretty cool at this point. Much better than the OFP implementations.

While the mission editor is a very big deal to me, there have been "major tangible game changes" with almost every release. WoI had some major changes that impacted gameplay greatly - AI fixes and addition of terrain effects on radar and missiles. The SF2 series took the ball from WoI and added accurate variants of major flyable aircraft covering equipment carried, exterior 3d models, and best of all, accurate unique 3d cockpits reflecting all of these variants. I won't necessarily be using a mission editor every time I play, but I see the cockpit interior almost 100% of the time I am playing. If I had to pick between the two, I would have chosen the cockpits given that mission files are only text files and two user made editors already exist. Again, I am very excited about the idea of the stock game having a built in editor, but my perspective on where it ranks versus other "major tangible game changes" is just a bit different than yours. Once the mission editor is debugged and working well, the game will be missing only one major component compared to Jane's Fighters Anthology: multiplayer. Unfortunately, TK has made it all too clear that his current business model will never be able to afford it, and as long as he is doing well, why should he take the risk of changing his business model to support a very small niche market. The closing of Fighter Ace leaves only Warbirds and Aces High 2 as the only MMOG which are dedicated flight sims. Aces High still has a very strong user base that just grew a bit with the addition of some Fighter Ace veterans, but Warbirds has a dwindling community. It wouldn't surprise me if Warbirds shut down completely any given month. As the flight sims shut down, World of Warcraft continues to rake in money at an amazing rate. I wish the flight sim community could attract that kind of user base. Then, the games would be doing much better. However, ArmA 2, Steel Beasts Pro PE, and the Black Shark DCS series have given me hope that the type of games I want will continue to exist via funding for real military simulators.

I am pretty sure a towed target can be done in some fashion, just a matter of the best way to do it. I am well aware of the range, but I haven't ever seen a target that looks like a sheet with bullet holes ripped through it. I have seen footage of both types of engagements and think it would be cool if the same visuals were present in the game.

Congratulations! ...and welcome to the club. I have had a hard enough time with one son. I can't imagine dealing with double trouble :) It won't be long before they understand what daddy is doing on the computer and want to find a way to participate to spend more time with you. But protect your power and reset buttons :) That is the first things they will find to get your attention.

I am looking at the possibility of making some "training missions" for the SF2 series and was using an old board game scenario book for ideas. One of the missions was to simply shoot at a gunnery banner as well as possible without shooting or colliding with the towing aircraft. It would be difficult to model a banner being flexible (i.e. bends when turning), but I would think a banner could be part of an aircraft's 3d model. Would I be wrong to think that it could consist of multiple meshes such that there would be separate damage textures for each section allowing review of where it had been hit? If it could be modeled as a pod that could be attached to any aircraft and still keep the multiple meshes for registering damage, that would be even better. Just a little something to think about. Ground targets in the form of gunnery bullseyes with multiple damage textures would be cool too.

Most people can't see a difference between a 720p and a 1080p tv either. Most gamers don't know what FSAA or AF is either. Find a game where you can very the frame rates from 30 to 60 to 90. Do a barrell roll in a high roll rate aircraft with the horizon rotating at the center of the view. If you can't tell the difference and like the 30 or 60 better than the 90, you can donate the hardware that does 90 fps to me :) My acquisition of an LCD monitor a few years back capped me to 60 fps, but my hardware usually limits me to 45 to 50 fps (cpu bound). In SF2, I can easily tell when the frame rate changes by 10 fps and can tell you the fps +/- 5 by how the aircraft handles in rolls and air-to-air gunnery. At 60+ fps, my gunnery is a lot better than when it is 20-30 fps: smooth tracking of LCOS gunsight = very high accuracy. If my fps are falling to 30 or lower, not only is the screen/motion a lot more jerky, but it means TrackIR and joystick inputs aren't being handled as well either. Another game where the difference directly affects my performance is Operation Flashpoint/ArmA2 (also Star Wars Battlefront). Not even using TrackIR or a joystick, the smoothness of movement and aiming with the mouse are critical. In OFP, I can easily achieve the FPS I want most of the time (locked at 60) and can handle an M-16A2 like it is a sniper rifle using just the iron sights. I had a friend visit and play Arma2 with me. The laptop is Core I7 with 6GB of RAM, but has a relatively low end ATi laptop graphics chipset, which I run at 1080p despite its limited processing power. My Athlon 64 3800+ has only 2GB of much older PC3200 RAM, but has an ATi HD4890 1GB graphics card. My kill ratio dropped by 10% when I switched to the visually slower laptop (20 to 35 fps). My friends kill rate more than tripled when he switched to my desktop. He now understands all to clearly how much the frame rate matters and how much the graphics card affects frame rate and quality. My desktop's CPU is 2.4GHz single core against the much faster core I7 laptop, yet my desktop plays with 40 to 50 fps at much higher image quality settings (higher FSAA, better shadows, etc). Just because the majority can't tell the difference between 30 fps and 60 fps doesn't mean there aren't people who can't, and it can affect gameplay dramatically. If I had the money, I would try to make all my games play at the highest possible resolution at the highest practical frame rate (2500 x 1600 and 60 or 120 Hz). Instead, I have to live with what I have and play older games or have crappy image quality if I want that kind of frame rates.

It is simply amazing how far PC flight sim graphics have come since Jane's Fighters Anthology and even Falcon 4.0. Today's untouched screenshots look better than yesterday's retouched box art. If it wasn't for the little puff of clouds and the repetitive pattern in the water, I could scarcely tell that the pair of A-4s above aren't real... And this thread is full of untouched pics of that same quality (and in some cases even better).

SP3 was the last patch that used this terminology, which was the patch series that matched WoV. The patches that brought SFP1 up to WoE standards were noted by their date. The first series that did so was May or 05 series. I say "series" because first there was a full-blown "service pack" which didn't require any previous upgrades and it was followed by a hotfix. Ultimately, the pre-WoI (Oct/Nov 2008 series patches) standard was 083006 (August 30 2006) was the long time standard that is compatible with almost every single release. I made a post detailing SFP1 patch history at Third Wire forums: http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5949 the answers to any questions about SFP1 patch history should be there. I even included extended posts of each "readme" from each patch / hotfix.

I haven't had any issues with steam lately. They are providing the latest patches as they are supposed to. Whereas not so long ago I had to disble their automatic updates and manually patch to the latest revision. There is a really good M60A3 for ArmA, but wouldn't know the first thing about whether it could be ported to ArmA2. As of August 21st, Steel Beasts Pro PE should be satisfying my desire for Cold War era matchups.

I think some of the missions are very fun, especially the helicopter ones, but overall it is boring compared to combat flight sims. If you want to practice button pushing/flight procedures or take some pretty screenshots, FSX is hard to beat. X-Plane is fast catching up, but FSX is still better overall out of the box and/or with addons.

Red Hammer was an addon for red campaign that came out prior to Resistance. I bought OFP x 3, Red Hammer x 3, and Resistance x 3 off the retail shelf as they were released so that I could have friends come over to play. Then I bought OFP GOTY x 5 at retail for $15 each - a great deal since it contained everything from the previous three releases that were about $30 each. Then I got a couple more of GOTY from GoG.com for $10 each. This was by far the best package since it consists of a single setup exe that installs everything in the right order including all the patches to have OFP 1.46 / Restistance 1.96. I learned I could save my registry keys from the other installs so that I can quickly install GOTY seven times using the single setup exe. This has been convenient because every now and then I still have all my friends over for an OFP LAN party. Any license conflicts are quickly resolved by reissuing the reg files so that no two PCs have the same license instead of having to track what PCs have which licenses and resinstalling to eliminate accidental duplicates. OFP is by far my favorite non-flight sim game of all-time. I consider ArmA and ArmA 2 to simply be expansions/patches of OFP. I just haven't played them as much since the hardware requirements greatly limit which PCs I can play them on.

I now have 3 copies of ArmA 2 (compared to 10 copies of OFP+Resistance/OFPGOTY), but I still need to buy 1 more video card to have a 3rd PC that can run it. I just got my first copy of Operation Arrowhead. Lightning damage to computer/controls/networking equipment just got me the money I needed to get a video card and I also finally bought Steel Beass Pro PE in preparation for the upcoming 2.5x release that will include M60A3 tanks. While I don't think the M60A3s will be internally crewable, their very existence will allow me to play out scenarios that interest me the most. Unfortunately, ArmA 2 does not have M60A3s :( I haven't been involved with any OFP mods for years much less any ArmA/ArmA 2 mods. Are there any decent high quaility packages for older equipment? I particularly loved the Vietnam mod for OFP: Hueys galore! I would also like to have any M48A3 and M60A1/A3 variants that might be available. It appears the one M60A1/A3 mod available was for ArmA, I don't see anything for Arma 2 yet :(

Ground threats are identified by a solid line. Air threates are identified by a dashed line. Radar mode is indicated by the length of the line. Search mode is indicated by a steady short line (1st ring) with no audio. Aquisition mode is indciated by a flashing medium line (3rd ring) with slow beeping audio. Tracking/Lock-on mode is indicated by a flashing long line (to outer edge of display) with fast beeping audio. Ground Search / Aquistion / Tracking Air Search / Aquisition / Tracking

Actually, twins have been around almost as long as the single engines by the same users of the current twins: USMC AH-1J Sea Cobras. But the AH-1T+ -> AH-1W -> AH-1Z is an entirely different beast in terms of engines, rotors, dimensions, armor, weapons systems. Besides performance/load, I love the twins because they retained the original round canopy glass, which looks much better to me than the US Army's flat plate glass. But to get back on topic, it is very hard for me to narrow my list of favorite airplanes to just one. The first airplane model I ever built is certainly in my top 5 and maybe number one: the B-17G. The next major model airplane I wanted and got was an F-4E because that is what the Thunderbirds were flying at the time. With the appearance of Baa Baa Black Sheep, the F4U Corsair became one of my favorites. Along the way, the P-51D, XB-70, F-15A, F-105D, C-5A, and UH-1D joined my group of favorites... but still, my most memorable models were my Monogram 1/48 B-17G and my Revell 1/32 F-4E. They were big and beautiful. Based on the fact that I fly F-4s a lot more than B-17s in PC flight sims, I would have to go with the F-4E as my all time favoirte.