Hey Chuck,
How would you compare the 2 dynamic campaigns?
Thanks.
OK, this might be a tough one though.
FB- campaigns are much more varied, as are the aircraft. In FB you have a wider selection of aircraft by far I can choose, say, a Luftwaffe career, in the Army Group North, let's say. I can choose a rank, what model plane I want to start with, the unit I want to fly with, and the year I want to start my career. the sim will make the required choices 'jibe' so you can't fly a Me-262 in 1941, for example
The squadron is managed for you, mostly. You'll see a roster, with names and ranks, and if you click on one of them, you can open that pilot's docket, and see an abbreiviated 'log', listing their kills and so on. there's also a unit history, indicating who dised, who is a replacement, etc.
If you click on your name, you get a detailed log, including the types of a/c you shot down, where, and so forth
That part is great. The campaigns themselves are merely Good for the most part. Fly here, do that, standard stuff, but it's not stellar. It does what it needs to do, and nothing more.
Depending on where you are, and when it is, you may get newer aircraft to replace your current model
You do not influence the war at all, which doesn't bug me, I don't think any single pilot could have done this
I give the campaigns in FB a 7.5 out of 10, mainly because while the campaigns could be better, at least they don't fall flat on their faces, and little things are done right, like you can see how many La-5fns you shot down, for example.
You may even spot some Ace's aircraft in a campaign, which also helps me overlook it's weaker elements
In CFS3-
The campaign is radically different. You can 'screw up' and lose the war- you must make Strategic descisons for each mission.
When you start, you make a Character. A little silly in my opinion, but it does address the question of pilot experience, and I have to admit, at least MS tried to model it somehow. Now, you get experience points (very sparingly) to bolster your stats in Eyesight G Tolerance and Health, and also personal Prestige and Squadron prestige. Prestige is used to 'pull strings' and get mew aircraft earlier than is normal for the Squadron, and to 'purchase' (somehow) personal aircraft for yourself.
To fly a Campaign mission in CFS3, you first see a big map of western Europe. there's a front line, and all sorts of icons, but essentially, you click on the front line someplace, and then options for missions that affect that sector come up, in order of importance. the goal here is to push the front line past certain 'victory points' and Invasion areas, to weaken your enemy, advance your own ground forces (you can actually order a ground offensive, somehow), and deny your enemy a chance at your own victory locations
All well and good, if you want that. personally, I want to fly missions, see the sights, come home in one piece and lie about my exploits at the OC until lights out
the missions themselves have much more 'feel' to them than the FB campaign missions, to me, although I did fly one FB mission as a VVS pilot that knocked my socks off, at night, against Finland, but in general, the CFS3 missions are better in the campaign. there certainly is more to see, and the ground scenery, while not as subtle as FB's is in general of higher quality. If the ground scenery in CFS3 had the subtle qualities of FB's it would look like the real thing
One thing about CFS3- you can land, re-arm, and make another sortie. Cannot do that in FB
The best aviation sim mission I ever played was a CFS3 campaign mission, at oh-dark-thirty, on June 6th, 1944. I saw warships off the Normandy coast fire on inland targets- and I could see the inland explosions from about 25K feet in my P-47
that was a "WOW" moment
FB seems to make a cleaner definition between the planes and the ground than CFS3 does, to me. I still lose a/c against the ground in FB. But in CFS3 it is maddeningly easy
FB does a lot of things right in career mode. What it does wrong, CFS3 does right. What CFS3 does wrong in it's campaign, FB does right
the variety of campaings, nationalities to fly for, and aircraft choice are big pluses for FB, as are the accurate unit markings that are just simply there.
CFS3 doesn't have the accuracy in unit markings, it has a limited selection of nationalities to fly for, and the plane selection is restrictive compared to FB
One huge difference-
In FB, you can make user made missions and static campaigns "out of the box". You place ground units, detail bits like oil barrels, static ground a/c, flying a/c, etc, and make your missions.
CFS3 has no such thing, out of the box. I am quite interested in the 3rd party mission builder for CFS3, i have not seen it yet
by Woodlouse2002 » Mon Jan 03, 2005 8:37 pm 
