To be published by Microprose
Previewed by Cat91 on 9/25/00

Article Discussion Forum

Guten Tag, combat flight fanatics! For the next couple of visits to the Scratching Post, the Cat is going to turn from the past and toward the future with a look at what many feel are the mighty slim pickin's due out soon to grace the hard drives of air combat fanatics. We'll start with B-17 II today, move to Rage PLC/Infogrames' Typhoon in our next installment, and finish up in October with looks at the ones this writer thinks are the wave of the future: IL-2 Sturmovik and Flanker: Attack! What have I to tell you, flight fans? Sims are NOT dead.

Consider: You all know that your writer is into jet combat. Simulations of Korea and the world wars are just too much twisted steel for one delicate little kitty to handle. Besides, I can't hit the broad side of a barn at two feet with a .50 cal. In Jane's WWII Fighters (scheduled for a retrospective sometime soon in this space) I keep getting in perfect IR missile launch position for a Sidewinder or Archer, and then cursing to myself when that P-51 or Bf-109 I'm in hasn't got that particular piece of ordinance. And bombing? With what bombsight? Enter the heavy four-engined bomber of World War II. The Memphis Belle. The B-17 Flying Fortress; the grand old dame of the high-altitude daylight bombing campaigns over Europe. It can carry twelve 500-pounders. So can an F-16...but is that the point here? Nah. Let's face it: Who wouldn't like to drop a load of mixed 500-pounder frags and incendiaries on evil Nazis and see 'em reap what they so lovingly sowed through the perspective of your very own top-secret Norden bombsight? Okay, okay. You have my interest.

I started following this title about a year back, when a guy by the name of Iain Howe, its lead designer and Wayward employee, made a few posts about it over at CombatSim.Com, and piqued my interest with some pretty outrageous claims. Will Wayward deliver? Leave us take a look.

First Impression

Some years back, Microprose was responsible for a combat flight classic, the original B-17 Flying Fortress. It was very detailed for its day, and simmers have long clamored for a modern-day update to this title. According to its press, B-17 II is that follow-on. The game is set during the time period 1943 to 1945, and Wayward states that they have set the ending date of both in-game campaigns to be that of the very last recorded B-17 strike over Europe, shortly before the Nazis threw in the towel. The Boeing B-17G, the penultimate Flying Fortress, is the featured aircraft. Bristling with defensive guns (which gave the bird its name) and able to lug a respectable bombload to hell-and-gone without need to land and refuel, this was the most-favored Allied mud-mover of the war (though B-24 fans would dispute me). Mr. Howe has made public claims that each and every system of this revered and venerable warbird is present, accounted for, and affects the flight model of, the in-game B-17. The start sequence for the engines is rumored to have been taken from the very Dash-1 (that's cute wanna-be pilot talk for driver's manual) of the Real Life B-17G! Artificial-intelligence help is supposed to be present for the more casual gamer to get into the game, and the rumored time-skip feature allows neophytes to skip the preliminaries and get right into formation.

1. Aircraft
Represented Wayward claims that not only bomber fans will be represented here. They say that they have modeled fighters as well-including the American P-51D Mustang, P-38J Lightning, and P-47 Thunderbolt, for those who would rather fly escort missions than do the nasty mud moving. And what would be an escort mission without the evil Hun to keep off the bombers? For our German friends, rumor has it that they can defend their homeland with Axis stalwarts such as the infamous Messerschmitt Bf-109 (I assume the G-6 variant) and jet powered Me-262, and the Focke-Wulf FW-190 (acclaimed as the best single seater of the war by both sides). There is a rumor that some enterprising Wayward employee has managed to slip in, by popular demand, the legendary Messerschmitt Me-163 "Komet," which is to date the only rocket-powered combat aircraft ever to fight. This hasn't been confirmed, but it seems that a lot of the faithful want it.

2. Fidelity
According to Iain Howe, (see the FAQ at www.bombs-away.net) in the B-17 every switch and every dial is represented at every position, and there are ten-count 'em-ten crewmembers. All controls are supposed to work, and all to impact the flight model appropriately. If true, that is a Great Leap Forward in modern flight simming. That alone brought my attention to this sim. It's hailed as the Fly! of combat flight. Will it meet the same fate at Chairman Mao's Great Leap Forward? The buzz from virtual pilots who've seen it at ECTS in London say that Mr. Howe is "spot on," as they say in Merrie Olde England, in his representations.

Some of the screenshots you can see over at the fansite I pointed to above bear this out. Windows are where they are supposed to be and at least one view from the Sperry ball turret (located in the belly of the B-17, this was where the smallest gunner sat and was the most dangerous position) looks like a photo I saw in a book once. I'm nervous, however, that there are no current cockpit shots out, other than those of several of the fighters. Those, by the way, are very reminiscent of those seen in Rowan's MiG Alley game, and will probably satisfy the majority of simmers. But where's the star attraction? I'd like to see the B-17 control panel, frankly-I'll be spending most of my in-sim time in the front office.

I have also seen screenshots of the Norden bombsight. CombatSim has some nice shots, as does Bombs-Away.net. Here are closeups, and a shot through the sight itself. Remember-this is over a year old. Wonder why we haven't seen much current on the insides of this bird? Anyway, as you can see, if they didn't change it, your look through the bombsight is pretty effective. Some of the ECTS reports indicate that clouds are 3-D and present, wind is modeled and must be dialed into the sight, and low cloud cover can obscure your view of the target just as it did in real life. Overall, the aircraft is looking pretty interesting.

Graphics

The word on the street is that B-17 II will sport a form of bump-mapping that enables one to look down from 25,000 feet and see fully colored terrain in bas-relief. The correct airfields-all of them-for the Allies and for the Luftwaffe in France, England, and Germany are rumored to be present in their historically proper places. The scale of the terrain is supposed to be 1:1 to the aircraft, meaning that air-transit times from London to Berlin are the same as in real life (however, a time-skip is promised for those of us who don't want to fly it all the way there). One interesting effect from the screenshots is the contrails that form from high-flying heavy bombers. Have you ever seen a jetliner fly by real high, trailing those long streams of vapor? They do it in B-17 II as well, and it really looks good. I've flown on a C-141 at altitude and looking out the radio operator's window in one screenshot at the engines gave me the same weird feeling.

The messages on the forums indicate that this great contrail-induced visibility of your squadron (B-17s flew in large groups, and the intent of the programmers is to have an Allied strike consist of three six-bomber groups) is not lost on the German antiaircraft gunners, who will be using 88mm guns to try and shoot you down with both random fire and full-scale box-barrages (filling the sky with a curtain of metal) as you approach. Dynamic lighting is promised, with gun-flashes in your face and spectacular explosions evident in the screenshots. They boast that over 200 targets, from U-Boat pens, to rocket launch complexes, to factories and oil refineries will be modeled in glorious 3-D, as will landmarks such as the Eiffel Tower in the bump-mapped cities. Mr. Howe has stated publicly that their bump-mapping is so good that one cannot pick out the 3D object as distinct from textured terrain around it-it all looks true-life. The screenshots do bear out that many 3D models are there in air and on ground, and actual trees dot a fractally-generated landscape based on real terrain features, such as roads. It has been boasted that one can navigate by the road network, and an early hope was to allow fighter raids with bombs as distinct from the strategic bombing, which did not work out. They really worked hard on the crewmembers-all ten were motion-captured and fully animated. It looks like most simmers will enjoy the graphics offerings, from the published screens. Bottom line is that the screenshots are awful pretty, though the Cat looks with a jaundiced eye on the claim that a P-200 with Voodoo 1 card will render acceptable frame rates. Don't believe that one, kids. Better boot this title up on at least a P-III/500 with 6th generation graphics card if you want the bells and whistles.

Gameplay

B-17 II is a simulation of the 8th U.S. Air Force's strategic bombing campaign in World War II Europe, and as such has two ongoing campaigns. There is no stand-alone mission generator or editor. The game focuses not just on flying, but on managing the crew of your aircraft. The B-17G had ten crew, including radio, navigator, bombardier, two pilots, and five gunners. In Single-Bomber mode, this game aims to allow the virtual pilot to interact with her men (it's WWII, kids-no American women flew combat) and take over any position. In jet sims, the avionics suite takes care of bombing set up, radios, and navigation, allowing one pilot to do the work of four. In the 1940s, though, mud moving was labor intensive. In B-17 II, each crew position is rumored to be fully operational, as noted above. The crewmembers have individual biographies, and personalities that will show up in combat. Further, Mr. Howe indicates that as the player becomes more and more proficient at use of things like the Norden bombsight, the crewmember assigned to that position gets better at his tasks. Husbanding your resources is therefore important. If you get people killed, you take off on the next mission with a rookie in that slot, reducing effectiveness when you personally are not seeing to his duties, and causing your rookie bombardier to drop 6,000 pounds of HE onto a school and church instead of that ball-bearing plant he was supposed to hit, merrily committing a war crime while you were busy shooting at Jerry fighters from the top turret (carefully, as you only have 1,000 rounds of ammo per gun. Shoot it up too soon and you're in deep kimchee, as the U.S. Army in Korea is wont to say). You'll hear it when one of your people gets hit, and can send other crew to him for first aid. If a critical member of the crew is incapacitated, another can try to take his place at your order. And if no one's available, you can't operate that position. This is a people business, pilots.

The game is dynamic, within limits. We did win the war, after all-that won't change. But no mission will ever quite play like the one before; what you do (or fail to do) is planned to influence future target selection. In Single-Bomber mode, you don't control target selection-the higher ups tell you where to go and what to bomb. According to Wayward, that means if you miss that U-boat pen, you'll have to eventually go back, and Jerry will be waiting for you with increased flak and fighters. The game also features a Squadron Commander mode where you get to have six B-17s (I think) at your disposal, and get to pick targets and plan loadouts (though you may be able to set your own loadout in the single bomber game too). Still, you cannot avoid strategic imperatives, and the 8th Air Force will tell you what general types of targets are operational priorities. You cannot avoid the Ploesti Olifield (or equivalent really bad mission), gang. Do it right the first time. Pick your ordinance with care. You have 500-pound General-Purpose H.E. demolition bombs, incendiaries, semi-penetrators, and full penetrators for those pesky sub pens. Not a bad selection of bombs. Note that according to the ECTS watchers there is a bomb-bay camera you can go to for the Dr. Strangelove view, and see the bombs drop just like the newsreels. That will really be cool. You can also make you own nose-art for the aircraft; bomber nose art is something American squadrons were legendary for. I want to use a black Halloween cat with big yellow eyes for mine, and call the bomber "The Cat's Meow." All in all, it looks rather interesting and innovative from a gameplay perspective.

Overall Impression and Marketing Efforts

I have spent a significant amount of time lurking on that site, and what marketing efforts there are are being made by the publisher are rather soundly directed toward men, and men alone. Women are not even an afterthought, only wanted, apparently, as slinky-looking and scantily-clad nose art. Some of this is, admittedly, a reflection of the time period represented. After all, the Soviet Union was the only one letting us fly combat back then. Americans saw their women as Rosie the Riveter, Doughnut Dollies, pinups, or Mom and Apple Pie; not as an equal in the cockpit. It took the U.S. until the 1990s to open its collective eyes to a woman's potential there. But I am surprised and disappointed at the closed atmospher I have seen on the BA forums, and on Combatsim's B-17 forum. Very few women, if any, will feel comfortable looking in on the online community for this game; this will mean that sales may not develop as they could have. After all, we fly too, and are a vibrant part of the online community for Falcon 4.0 and European Air War, two of the biggest recent Microprose sims.

Another disturbing development is the fact that Microprose has insisted Wayward drop all development of multiplayer support for B-17 II in order to get the title out the door as soon as possible. B-17 II is a year overdue, and Hasbro Interactive has chosen to recoup its investment as best it can - now - without regard for the fact that for over a year the developer has publicly represented that in-plane multiplayer for up to 32 players was a key goal for the game. That's created a storm of controversy among the game's most fanatical fans, and recent surveys indicate that many are reconsidering a "buy" decision for this game. This would be unfortunate, in my mind, and reinforce a negative perspective among large game houses that serious sims are not what the public wants. The fan base is also concerned that Hasbro/MPS will not support B-17 II post release, given the dearth of support for Gunship!, Falcon 4.0, and European Air War. This too will hurt B-17's sales and lead to the fulfillment of a self-ordered prophecy that combat simming is dead. In reality, this was one title that could so easily have been a for-sure blockbuster, if only it had been marketed a little better.

It still is worth a look, and despite the inescapable fact that no women were in the crews of B-17s; I recommend this game to the woman virtual pilot. Its crew-management functions in particular, and its emphasis on scalability and strategic decision making, will prove an enjoyable and intense experience for any virtual pilot, and women in particular.