Flying Circus Vol 1,2,3

[Hootman]

Just a few questions for those of you who have Vol 1 and 2.

Now that the career mode has been implemented in Vol 2, I did some reading last night on the dev process, and understand how they are releasing it in volumes. I'm not a fan of the cost of each volume, but that's not the subject. I'll buy on sale I guess.

Basically just wondering how players view the overall experience, reference the graphics, the depictions in game of the ground battles, bases, front lines, things like that. And the VR experience.

I've watched the few youtubes I could find of Vol 2, and it looks nice. Are the graphics the same for Vol 1 and 2? I think as part of the update they updated the graphics in Vol 1, no?

I also understand that when Vol 3 (if it is pursued) is released, that there will be one continuous front. So right now, are the frontlines from Vol 1 and Vol 2 meshed? If you have both, can you fly the aircraft in Vol 1 into the area included in Vol 2, and vice versa?

If you own both, are the aircraft from Vol 1 available in Vol 2? Can I start a career in Vol 2, with an aircraft from Vol 1, and fly the span of both theatres?

I hope you know what I'm getting at, how do the two volumes mesh together. And, can you have just Vol 2, or do you have to start with Vol 1?

I also hope these aren't dumb questions. Just trying to figure out if I want to delve into the action, because the prices are, well, high. I certainly love the thought of flying in WWI, the slower speeds to enjoy the scenery, etc.

Thanks

[d[-_-]b]

I only have Vol 1 so far, will get Vol 2 later. I've also only just started really playing with Flying Circus Vol 1 as I was waiting for Vol 2 and the updates to bring it along a bit.

Vol 1 has a pretty good roster of iconic planes to get started with and master, just within that. I did pick up the Snipe on discount to get a feel for how a late model WW1 plane compares against the mid-war ones though.

It's pretty impressive, once you add a few mods like Dynamic Effects and Units to spice it up. See https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/77787-dynamic-effects-plus-units/ and make sure you enable the included all effects txt file for full effect.

Vol 1 map, Arras, is a part of the greater Vol 2 map Western Front, which you get if you have Vol 1. See https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1nEGqkqYUGBipkmMq-NSwixdUHmU&ll=50.03862773823782%2C20.15498311953124&z=6 for Vol 1 map.

Vol 2 map extends this all the way down to Nancy/Metz area. So in the Western Front map you now have two areas of Quick Mission Builder, one which seems to be Arras map (more or less) and a new one overlaying Nancy/Metz, with space in between, I guess Vol 3 will be fleshing out the middle to link them up, unsure though, but the front does run from one to the other. Arras Vol 1 map is still separate with it's own QMB as well.

Vol 1 also gets the Career mode that comes with Vol 2, but obviously only for the planes you have in Vol 1, unless you have Vol 2 as well.

The couple of missions I've done so far are great. Machines are slower, but the action is no less dangerous and different in its own way, and quite atmospheric with the Dynamic Effects mod adding random explosions etc. I was heading to the front on one mission and saw this massive explosion in the distance, reminded me of one of the mines they used. I really started to appreciate the transition from behind the lines to the front then, and it starts to draw you in, especially when you start to see more activity going on.

Even though the basics of Air Combat Maneuvering were defined in this important period, it's completely different flying/fighting from WW2 ACM even using some of the same maneuvers. The planes dictate the parameters even more so than WW2, and you need to respect that.

Looks like Vol 2 planes are also used for AI even if you don't have it, so you can still shoot down bombers.

The only cons I can see are the ground textures could be bumped up, but that would also probably incur a performance hit against the flying so trade offs.

This was the genesis of flight technology turbocharged by the god of war, so it's great to see someone is still developing it as a living reminder.

Tallyho Biggles (or Manfred)! Two thumbs up.

[Hootman]

Thanks, that pretty much covers everything I was wondering about. It's a shame the Vol 1 and Vol 2 map don't join, but I'm thinking that's a marketing strategy.....you're going to have to have Vol 3 to make 1 big map...then again, from what I've seen Vol 3 isn't promised, but seems likely.

[Shibbyland]

Looks like you got your answer but I'll add my 2 cents. I've bought all of the WW2 content since BoS like it's some kind of addiction only to find I never really get into it. I've barely touched Kuban, Bodenplatte or Normandy. Don't get me wrong, the aircraft are great but the WW2 stuff just doesn't feel very engaging. Probably because of the career generally involving smalls formations at low level. It just doesn't feel authentic if that makes sense.

Flying Circus is a totally different story. I only just bought FC1 a few days ago and I really like it. For me pretty much exclusively playing single player, the scale of combat in the WW1 setting feels much more authentic.

The aircraft are a bit too easy to shoot down but that's probably because I aim for the enemy pilots and given they have no protection, they die and that's that. Shooting down 5 or more in a flight is standard.

[PKallday]

FWIW Vol 3 is officially on the way now. When they released Vol 2 they made a simultaneous announcement that Vol 3 & 4 are on the way as well. According to the forums the plan is:

FC3 (end of 2023)

German Albatros D.II fighter
German fighter Halberstadt D.II
French Nieuport 17.C1 fighter
French Nieuport 11.C1 fighter
French fighter Nieuport 17.C1 GBR adapted for British service
French Hanriot HD.1 fighter.
British two-seat reconnaissance aircraft R.E.8.
British two-seat medium bomber F.E.2b.

with Western Front map and Pilot Career mode finalised - "In the 3rd part of the project, it is planned to make the Western Front map and the Pilot Career mode final. Map objects and Career mode will cover the entire length of the front lines on the map, complementing and improving the content of Rise of Flight. There will be new industrial plants, farms, front line objects and other details. The map will have five seasons: Summer, early Autumn, late Autumn / early Spring, Winter and Spring. Release of the Flying Circus Vol. III is scheduled for the end of 2023. The first airplanes of the set will be available this summer via the early access program our players are familiar with."

FC4

British Sopwith Pup fighter.
British rear-engine fighter Airco DH.2.
British two-seat reconnaissance Sopwith 1 1/2 Strutter.
German fighter Albatros D.III.
German Fokker E.III monoplane fighter.
German two-seat reconnaissance Roland C.IIa.

with further improvement to the maps

[d[-_-]b]

See https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/44035-flying-circus-aircraft-guide-%E2%80%94-by-bender-larnedras-trupo-updated-28122021/

[Urocyon]

Would be really nice if the AI was more aggressive, right now it feels like it's an arcade or they're all loaded up with tranquilizers...

[Hootman]

I've pretty much made up my mind to start building the library, and will just go from !-4 as they are on sale. I'm not particularly please with the pricing, at full price $80.00 each, that's going to be $320 for the complete "base" series with all the maps unlocked. So that's not including DLA which may be numeroous.

So I have read their basic goal is to re-create Rise of Flight, but updated. I looked at Rise of Flight, and it's about $180 for base game (free) and all the DLC on Steam.

Basically since FC is "part" of the Great Battles, I assume that means there was basically little cost put into things like the game engine. Understand that it's being created with third party devs, but the cost in my opinion does not compute correctly. There seems to be an across the board gaming industry price point of $69-$79 dollars.

I'm an OG gamer, started on the Ataris 2600, and went into PC gaming when PC's became readily available and not considered a "niche" thing, and knew early on that PC gaming beats a console hands down and the future was unlimited when it came to what could be done with PC gaming. So I recall the average cost of a game being $25-$30, and that was also a time when they were bought in store, and bascially you could count on a few updates via downloads for games. I still have my Falcon 4 and Jane's series games, and they came with nice user manual binders and maps included. Falcon 4 alone is amazing with a manual that's about an inch and a half thick.

Of course time and inflation affects pricing, but considering that actual development costs are "relatively" low compared to creating a new game from scratch, the pricing bothers me. IL-2 and DCS both take hits for DLC pricing, (not anywhere near as bad as FS2020), but for the most part I don't think the DLC for IL-2 is outrageous EXCEPT when it comes to things like FC. I would really like to see a cost breakdown of development and deployment pricing.

From looking at the maps sizes for flight games, FC, if intent is to somewhat recreate Rise of Flight, will have no larger map when completed. If they were to have done it all together and released as a $320 base game, you can imagine the blowback. FS2020 caught a lot of flak for Premium Deluxe Edition ($119.99) cost.

Pricing is what it is, so I'll budget it in I guess, buying on sale, but I'll never be convinced that's a justifiable price for what is basically an updated version of RoF with VR.

I see that RoF is free for base game, I'll be loading that up tonight just to take it for a spin, and I MAY go ahead and pick up FC2 now with the introductory price.

[Shibbyland]

The AI is atrocious. It’s like it only uses 70% of what it’s aircraft is capable of. I mainly play the Se5a which as I understand had a reputation for being powerful but stable. There’s no way I should be able to hop from enemy tail to enemy tail with impunity when I’m up against Fokkers and I don’t have an altitude advantage.

Still like the game but It’s far too easy to survive in a dogfight.

[shadowgravy]

I only have Vol. 1. I tried out the improved Arras map when it was released along with the new 1918 map (you get both maps even if you own only one volume), and I didn't see much of a difference in VR. Both maps are similar in look and quality to the Rheinland summer map. The villages look good down low though -- FWIW I like to drive the Tank Crew vehicles around on the WWI maps. No Man's Land seems improved but it is still obviously 'painted on' to the landscape.

I flew my first career mission tonight. I decided to enter as a French pilot to try out a new nationality (I forgot that there isn't any pilot chatter anyhow) at the earliest date. I then selected the Escadrille Americaine and was allowed to join. Unfortunately I do not own the aircraft the squadron was using, so I was sidelined but given permission to transfer to another unit. I transferred to a SPAD squadron and the next day I was sent out on a free hunt.

Over No Man's we encountered observation balloons. My SPAD XIII sent the first one down in flames. I lined up on a second one, stitched it with a long burst, and rolled left for another pass. Ground troops sent up a sheet of small arms fire that zipped around my head and sieved my right wing. Meanwhile, two Albatrosses interdicted my squad mates. I attempted to climb to meet the enemy. One Albatross passed in front of my guns and I fired a leading burst that seemed to do some light damage. The other SPADs shot down one Albatross and forced the other to withdraw.

Having not flown Flying Circus for a long while, I was reminded how difficult it can be to aim and shoot effectively--these planes are very 'stick and rudder' to control. I waste a lot of lead as my nose oscillates around. Reloading guns in combat is oddly kind of satisfying though.

My squad wandered its way to the assigned mission area and circled for a while before inexplicably returning back to No Man's Land. I targeted another balloon, angering a battery of AA gunners below. I swooped down to strafe a gun position. Two Fokker Dr.1s came into view. I feebly climbed and attempted to latch onto one. My prey seemed to be a rookie but he was still able to out turn me. My bullets struck portions of his aircraft and I saw a light mist trailing from his engine. I had to disengage and turn my attention to the other Fokker; he had evaded my wingmen and was coming after me. The pennant on his wing showed he was the leader, and his skill was superior to the pilot I had just been pursuing.

We chased each other in a continuous circle but I knew I didn't stand much chance of establishing an advantage. His bullets ripped into my wings and fuselage. I dropped to rooftop level over a village. Two SPADs attempted to best the Fokker as I climbed back to join the fight. The Fokker again fell onto me. We circled. I turned hard; he turned harder and blasted me with a hail of lead. It was his last move however, as he stalled and plummeted into the earth.

Now my shredded aircraft was leaking fuel and I was struggling to maintain altitude. I had no rudder control. I had to pass over the trenches to get back to friendly lines. I wrested my aircraft through tracer fire and flak, and then over lush rolling hills and forests of billowing trees until my aerodrome came into view. My engine sputtered as I set down gently in a nearby field.

[shadowgravy]

Originally posted by Hootman:

I've pretty much made up my mind to start building the library, and will just go from !-4 as they are on sale. I'm not particularly please with the pricing, at full price $80.00 each, that's going to be $320 for the complete "base" series with all the maps unlocked. So that's not including DLA which may be numeroous.

I only got the first Flying Circus to try it out in VR; and I got it on sale. It is a great VR experience. I never tried Rise of Flight. I did however fly some earlier World War One flight sims (mods of air combat games TBH) and I didn't really enjoy them. Flying Circus isn't really my thing either, but it is fun in its own way. I'm not as proficient as some of the other posters I suppose, so I still find the AI to be a sufficient challenge.

[d[-_-]b]

Hot damn, the flak is really well done. Watching those little glowing balls leave the ground and slowly speed up and zip past you, black puffs rocking your ship with solid thumps of explosions, shrapnel zinging past. Doing a dogfight in the middle of it was excellent fun.

It's well worth the time to do some solo time to master the Sopwith Camel, especially how to do coordinated tight turns (step away from the bubble) and spin recovery.
The Camel is great but has a nasty tendency for accelerated stalls not just low speed stalls, so mastering spin recovery will improve your survival skills.

Entente planes spinning RIGHT : Stick BACK and into the spin, then opposite rudder. Throttle down for SPAD and Camel
Camel Spinning LEFT: Stick FORWARD and into the spin, then opposite rudder.

Yesterday I died twice augering in from unrecoverable spins in the Camel, today I recovered from three nasty spins in the middle of a dogfight using the the above. Good fun when you can control the little beast. Also Zoom out to see the instruments to get a better FOV and SA + F10 save for foward & Up views for better visibility, and use the modded top wing with a better view. I added the light L key as well as it's a bit dark in the camel cockpit.

Just did a 1 on 1 against random German planes that ended up being in the middle of a flak barrage and it was the best experience I've had in IL2 so far. Great sound effects, Camel can turn on dime when get the hang of it, it's like pivot move with slow motion stick wrestling to change direction quickly as the target switches, close call almost collisions, flaming triplanes with chutes. Nice job!

Repeat the above with Fokker D VIIF.
Spin Recovery.
German planes, not Fokker: Stick FORWARD and into the spin, then opposite rudder.
German planes, Fokker: Automatic recovery.

Very different from the high speed (relatively) combat of WW2.

Both great in their own ways. I'd give it three thumbs up if I had another one.

[unknown]

Originally posted by Hootman:

The reality is that il2 great battles is the cheapest on the market when it comes to modern combat flight simulators. Flight simulators are niche and also take a lot to develop from a coding standpoint. I mean if you look at how long it took them to get flying circuis 1 and 2 out, it clearly was more than a port. Because it took them 2 years each. 4 years until a career mode came out. Given that 4 years of labor was spent by that team and then looking at how many people will buy these modules. I mean on steam il2 has a 252 concurrent player average. Now I would say there is a large percentage that buys off of the website. And lets be generous and say its 50%. That would put this at 500 concurrent players. Compared to other games, this is a low volume business. If you have high volume you can get buy making 5 bucks on each copy sold. If you have a low volume you may need to increase your price to be able to pay the bills. Flight sims know they are niche so they cost more than other games given they know they will not sell all that many copies.

But do also note that the flight sim community tends to be the community that will spend thousands of dollars on flight gear and vr headsets. So they have deeper pockets and as a result you get the pricing model you see in this game, dcs world, and the various civilian flight simulators like x-plane or msfs 2020 where a single plane can cost you 30-60 dollars.

[Hootman]

Originally posted by unknown:

Originally posted by Hootman:

The reality is that il2 great battles is the cheapest on the market when it comes to modern combat flight simulators. Flight simulators are niche and also take a lot to develop from a coding standpoint. I mean if you look at how long it took them to get flying circuis 1 and 2 out, it clearly was more than a port. Because it took them 2 years each. 4 years until a career mode came out. Given that 4 years of labor was spent by that team and then looking at how many people will buy these modules. I mean on steam il2 has a 252 concurrent player average. Now I would say there is a large percentage that buys off of the website. And lets be generous and say its 50%. That would put this at 500 concurrent players. Compared to other games, this is a low volume business. If you have high volume you can get buy making 5 bucks on each copy sold. If you have a low volume you may need to increase your price to be able to pay the bills. Flight sims know they are niche so they cost more than other games given they know they will not sell all that many copies.

But do also note that the flight sim community tends to be the community that will spend thousands of dollars on flight gear and vr headsets. So they have deeper pockets and as a result you get the pricing model you see in this game, dcs world, and the various civilian flight simulators like x-plane or msfs 2020 where a single plane can cost you 30-60 dollars.

Nope. Not buying that reasoning, because I can't believe FC developement is complex enough to cost that much to cover their nut as compared to DCS aircraft.

First, you can't compare the cost of modeling and building a bi-plane with basically no complex aircraft systems to a DCS F-16 or any other aircraft in DCS. Even compared to WWII IL-2 aircraft, you cannot convince me a bi-plane requires a higher level of development manhours or difficult systems. What are the in depth systems or graphics that would create such a high cost? There are no avionics, radar, weapons systems, no animations like moving parts for landing gear, rotors, etc.

Second, we already have a glimpse into their thought process when it comes to building something, i.e. heavy bombers. They have made it clear that developing the many crew stations and animations is a mineshaft they could never get gold out of. If they used the reasoning you stated, i.e. building it as a niche and just charging a ton of money for it, then they would make at least one heavy bomber and chage the cost to cover it.

Third, the map. Sure, maps are tough, but if you go to the google site that has the map sizes for DCS, IL2, Falcon 4, and Rise of Flight, you can see that the original ROF map is smaller than the Bodenplatte map. And their stated goal is to basically duplicate the ROF main map in Vol 1,2,3. And the 1 and 2 maps, which isn't on that website, would only make up 1/3 of the ROF map for each volume. So mapwise, if anything, each one would roughly only be 1/3 the cost of Bodenplatte, would it not? There is no groundbreaking new technology being utilized, like FS2020, which is using a technique that has rarely or never been attempted (Blackshark ai for generating the buildings based on Bing map imagery), and they're doing the entire planet, with no load screens, a seamless transition to fly all the way around the world.

Lastly, the game engine. It's already there. There is no dev cost for that. Maybe there is some additional code that is needed, but we aren't talking a whole new engine and scripting build. It's a module / plug in to the existing one. Same mission builder. Same or very similar GUI. Each FC volume is a plugin/module for the base game.

I have read some of the posted info from the devs on why it is being created in volumes (basically to pay the cost as they go), and I will continue to read up on this, but I really don't see anything that is so above and beyond anything else anyone else is doing that would explain that pricing.

Basically everything I see about FC tells ME that a WWI combat flight simulator would be at the lower cost of all type of the combat flight sime genre, again given the fact that they are simple aircraft (compared to modern large passenger and fighter jets and helicopters with detailed aircraft navigation systems, hydraulic systems, communication systems, spinning rotor systems, radar and weapons systems, moving parts animations, on and on), and mainly consist of a mostly static graphic of the cockpit for 10 small aircraft for each volume. There are no complex calculations for bomb dropping from 15,000 feet, or high speed air to air or ground to air missiles that have to adjust in milliseconds in flight. It's a small plane flying about 0-200 KMH, firing bullets a very short distance, and dropping basic small "bombs" that require no calculations for being laser or radar guided. No AWACS. No inflight refueling. No locking in on a laser paint from a seperate ground unit.

If a new customer wants to just fly an F-16 in DCS, he just buys the F-16 and downloads the base game for free. If a new user wants to fly WWI acft in FC1, he has to spend $80 for BoS on top of $80 for FC1.

Technically you cold argue that's 10 aircraft compared to 1. But really, it's not like they are designing each one from scratch. Some of the work was probably lifted from RoF, and/or once 1 of the aircraft was created, the basic flight model could then be adjusted for the others. I can't believe they are so vastly different that each aircraft must be created from scratch.

It's their game, and their pricing, so it is what it is and the customer can decide to spend the money or not, but I would have to see actual details of dev costs to develop what is basically a module consisting of 10 relatively simple aircaft with relativelly small map, and I say "simple" as compared to complex modern fighters and helicopters that are modeled with many indepth complex operating systems and very detailed moving parts animations, all of which have the similar "niche" standing. I would have to see that to make me understand the cost.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy and appreciate everything they create. I just think the pricing is sketchy.

[unknown]

Originally posted by Hootman:

snip

I definitely am not claiming that it was the same amount of work as the other projects. I mean it just isn't. And there likely should be reduced costs. But how much I cannot say.

My claime is that it is more work than it seems. Mainly because of the length of time it took. I mean it is possibly they remodeled everything from scratch and that would have taken more time. But that also could be considred to just be a dumb decision considering that rise of flight already exists on an outdated version of the engine. It could be that the conversion process is more complex, but I have no details as i am not a developer.

All I was saying was that it still took them 2 years for each module. Now its also possible that the other wwii modules took more time. I mean just because it took 2 years from the announcement date to release doesn't mean that work wasn't being done before hand.

They are also having a completely different team working on it and that team may simply be smaller and that would also be less man hours spent considering the lower number of employees.

So my claim was not with comparing FC to the other il2 titles. Because it does seem to be less work (not sure on exactly how much less). My claim was that there is more work for less profit when compared to other games in other generas like fps or rts games. And I was comparing it to other simulators as being cheaper than other flight simulators.

But obviously comparing modules inside of il2 is a different story as there are different levels of value. Bodenplatte for example is a great value and so is the kuban. FC 1 was terrible, tank crew is somewhat overpriced and fc2 is closer, but potentially a bit overpriced when compared to their other modules.

I mean The real answer as to why fc costs 80 dollars is because its the standard for all of their new modules. They had a price increase and announced it, but also cannot lesson the price of their earlier modules. I mean with finances these days I understand a price increase. But I doubt they are internally measuring the specific value of each module compared to each other. More of just how much they want to sell all modules regardless of how much work it was.

Having been behind pricing choices in my current job I will attest that the decisions are generally more gut feeling than anything. I mean you need to make money, but also not scare customers away. Alternatively being priced too low will turn away potential customers and you generally just find something that feels like it fits. Generally price figure out what you want to charge and put its retail price a bit above and its sale price a bit below and you average out to the price you want to sell it at. Obviously consumers and retailers think differently when the question of price comes up. A customer will want to have the best deal possible and the retailer wants the opposite so you compromise.

[d[-_-]b]

I tend to go with unknown on this, being a developer and knowing what's involved.
It's always more work than it seems, and just because the planes might be less complex doesn't mean the work is less complex on a linear reduction scale. Systems are systems.

Not to diverge too much, but pricing is an evolving area too, across the FS market.

MSFS marketplace is redefining general FM add-on pricing purely because of the scale of XBox.

It takes a certain scale for the formula of "lower price, more buy" to work, but that's definitely at play now on the XBox marketplace. Some are sticking to the traditional ~$60 price for "study level", while others are finding it more lucrative to lower the price dramatically and get more units sold to make up the difference, and then some.

I've been told the real figures for some releases. They blow away previous sales figures in the FS market by orders of magnitude. It's also false to assume console players only want "lite" arcade flight products.

IL2 is a smaller market though, than tubeliners/VA and GA.
But as also noted, there are regular massive sales of ~85% off on IL2 content, so you only have to wait a bit and you can get the lot for a very reasonable price. Just wait. I bought FC 1 for $27 back in Oct 21, which is a reasonable price for it I think. Snipe cost me $15, so that's it for me for a while. Plenty to work with in the meantime.

That said, I'm still convinced at some point MS will leverage MSFS infrastructure into a new iteration of Combat Flight Sim as a separate product, likely when more of the core issues are resolved and MSFS is a solid base to add technical elements of combat to. A few non-trivial technical issues to solve doing it, but could be feasible.