The highly anticipated sequel to FLANKER and FLANKER 1.5 is close at hand. The original FLANKER will hold a revered place in the heart the hard-core sim crowd along side FALCON 3.

FLANKER was, and still is, considered by many as the ultimate flight simulation, with one of the best flight models in a PC simulation to date. With the 1.5 update, cooperative multi-play was added which for many pretty much sealed it as the "only sim on my hard drive."

Balance of Trade

As with any sim, there were game play vs. realism trade-offs, as well as performance trade offs. The most noted trade-offs were the graphics. By the time FLANKER released, there were machines easily capable of a higher level of graphics while still being able to run the complex calculations demanded by the realistic flight model, AI and weapons which were taxing the CPU.

The rival for king at the time, EF2000 from DiD, proved that high-end graphics and realism could be mixed. The flat polygons of Flanker made low level flying hazardous and for many detracted from the immersion. But for the true fans of ultra realistic simulations, this sim was as close as it had ever been.

Eye of the Beholder

FLANKER 2.0 is set to carry on the tradition set by its predecessor. The first thing you notice of course is GRAPHICS. Where the original was behind the curve, 2.0 is on par, and in some areas maybe even better than what is on the shelf today.

While to my eye, the color pallet is a bit bland - somewhat pastel, almost cartoonie; the overall effect of the images is very impressive. Detail is very good. High altitude flying gives you a terrain that will force you to remind yourself it is only a game. Detail on the aircraft is good, but not a benchmark. My feeling here reminds me of my racing days and paint jobs on the motorcycles … at 100 miles an hour, who is gonna know? At 1000 knot closure … are you gonna really see all that much detail? Not a big deal.

As I flew FLANKER 2.0 at E3, I asked Carl Norman about the omission of the 2D cockpit. After slewing around the 3D virtual cockpit, I had to agree with the reasoning. Why? The virtual cockpit is fully functional, is gorgeous, works well, and adds to the immersion level.

This is by far the best cockpit in a game to date. It does lack "clickability", but with the plethora of control panel peripherals available today, this is a minor annoyance at best. Slew your head around and you get a very realistic field of view and head motion. So real, in fact, that your shoulders get in the way at extreme over the shoulder glances.

Of course the real human eye could compensate for many of the limitations. But since NO game has ever pulled this modeling off, I think I can safely say that the views in 2.0 are some of the best out there.

Low Level and Terrain

Flying close to the ground in 2.0 is exhilarating. Flanker 2.0 may not ship with the best low level graphics around, but they are very good. There is also a good sensation of speed. I always enjoyed blasting down roads at 20 meters in the original, 2.0 is even more fun. Come upon a town and you get another surprise.

None of this textured terrain with a few 3D buildings like most sims. 2.0 has a true 3 dimensional city. The buildings sort of "sprout" up, or appear, as you get closer, which is distracting. This may or may not improve from what I was told. If not, it won't be a "game killer", but it leaves me knowing that there has got to be a better way to do this.

In the Sky

Back up in the air, you can actually see and make out aircraft at a mile or so out. Missile launches will assist in locating bandits, albeit maybe a bit too late ;-D , with good smoke effects. Explosions and various special effects are well done, as good as the current standard today.

The flight model in 2.0 has improved over the original FLANKER, if you can believe it. These are little tweaks that have made one of the best flight models ever just a little bit better. It has a feel that is comparable to the best flight models out today.

While the flight model of the flown aircraft should equal the best today, the AI flight models are some of the most true to life and realistically modeled to date. Aircraft act like and are limited to true to life principals and properties. You won't see bombers making 45-degree banks or vertical climbs in FLANKER 2.0. The game shows a great deal of attention to detail in this area.

FLANKER fans will easily be able to jump right into 2.0 with a minimal learning curve. This includes flying, controls, interface and even the Mission Editor.

The Mission Editor

The Mission Editor is still one of FLANKERS strongest suits in my opinion. Working within the limitations of what the sims functionality parameters are, you can do anything you want with any functional unit. Missions can be built quickly, easily and with a bit more detail than the original. A logical evolution.

Not much more can be said about the enhancement of one of the best mission editors in a flight sim ever. I expect to be involved in the network testing of 2.0 and will be able to delve deeper into the mission editor. I am sure there are testers that have a much better understanding of this area than I do at this point.

Mission Builder. Click for 1024x768.

While weapons specifications for the Eastern weapons is not as easily accessible as their Western counterparts, based on the available data I would venture to say that the weapons are modeled better than any previous simulation. Real life parameters and tactics will definitely play an integral role in this sim. Pk and maneuvering abilities seem pretty accurate as well. I need to play with this area a bit more, but expect my impressions to be confirmed and more entrenched.

Avionics Upgrades

Since I am no expert in the SU-27 avionics package, I can only truly compare it to the package in the original FLANKER. It has all of these features and a few more as well. There are a few moved gauges and such on the panel, but all the data is here just like before. The cockpit is semi-intuitive and will be quickly mastered by former FLANKER pilots.

Multiplayer

Okay, you knew I would get to it sooner or later … multi-player. FLANKER 2.0 plans to sport a full complement of multi-player functionality including cooperative multi-play in the campaign and mission editor created sorties. It looks like it will sport at least the same abilities as 1.5.

The 209th was able to get 14 in a LAN session in 1.5 in a 48-hour mission that was built by 6 people and merged. It appears 2.0 will be as user friendly to 3rd party applications as the original. Expect add-on campaigns and utilities to enhance the experience here.

Carry Me Away!

The flight sim community has been crying for a hard-core sim with carrier ops. 2.0 delivers by adding the SU-33 into the mix for carrier ops. Remember the Russians do not use catapults, only the "ski jump" nose carriers. This is a new and unique challenge for those of us used to catapult launches. It is a tense and exciting launch that can be mastered with a minimum of difficulty.

Click for 640x480 shot of Kuznetsov.

But no matter how many launches you make, each one makes you do the little "come on, come on, come on" chant. I only managed one landing on deck so far (my call sign is CRASH after all), but the voice over training sessions will help newbies. While the aircraft are virtually identical in all other aspects, the addition of the 33 gives you the carrier operations that are so greatly sought after.

The Ground War

I saved the ground war for last. If anything in 2.0 is lacking, it would be this. Some have complained about the "semi-dynamic" campaign, which to me is an oxymoron, but I will defer this rant to another article.

Yet as with most scripted/branched campaigns, a little smoke and mirrors can still provide an immersive and engrossing experience. But the fly in the ointment of the campaign is that there are no moving ground forces. The fleets, however, will not be static.

The fleets will return fire with on board SAM and air defense systems. While I believe these are just water-based versions of the ground units, I can accept this. And the land based SAM and AAA will engage you in a similar fashion to the original.

But there is no ground force interaction. There is no true ground war. If you destroy forces not in your primary target area, they all reappear in the next mission (one of my biggest issues with many "semi-dynamic" campaigns). Attrition must be figured into the scripting, but will not take into account exceptionally good or bad results. Note, however, that the sim is only in beta and this could yet change by release date.

If there is any feature that will hold back this sim, this is it. There has already been much-heated debate on the web regarding this issue. The die-hard staunch defenders are the FLANKER faithful, who cannot be faulted for their loyalty. But they are missing the importance of a realistic backdrop for the air war as well as the lack of continuity this type of campaign is destined to create.

A Compromise?

At the least, the ground forces within a scripted campaign (or mission editor missions) should be allowed to move and interact. It has been done before, JANES F-15 did it with no real problems. This does not rectify the destruction of non-designated targets reappearing in the next mission, but would go a long way to shore up the immersion level of the sim as well as give some sense of purpose to the mission at hand.

With no ground war, with no ground force interaction, with no attrition based on performance (instead mission assessment is based on whether you hit that one special target - on that basis you win or lose, no other variable) there is no need for an air war.

Mission Editor

A Sense of Purpose

Yet air sorties are support for the ground troops. Even in Kosovo, there was not air combat for the sheer sake of air combat. The NATO forces were bombing ground troops and installations; units that once destroyed, remained destroyed, and troops that would move and would interact with ground forces they contacted. Had these troops not been in Kosovo, there would have been no air war.

I fear that without at least a smoke and mirrors approach to this problem, it will quickly become frustrating to those of us who are trying to win a campaign. How many of us have come back from a mission after obliterating a critical airfield in addition to the factory we were tasked with only to have jets scrambled out of that very same airfield for the next mission?

Flanker Salvation?

With this in mind, it is fortunate that the Mission Editor is as flexible and complete as it is. I foresee a large bank of long-term goal missions being traded around the web similar to the 48-hour mission the 209th created for 1.5. With the mission editor, it is also possible to create your own mini-campaign with frequent breaks and removal of destroyed units and locations, the possible advancement of ground troops etc. all via editing.

SUMMARY

FLANKER 2.0 will indeed be a pinnacle in the flight sim community. It will have a similar impact that the original and its 1.5 add-on had, and will be "must buy" for any flight sim enthusiast that wants to experience an beautifully modeled Eastern Block fighter. To compare it to an existing sim would be unfair as it is still in beta, but expect it to rival the heavy hitters already out or due out around the same time as 2.0.

But I can't help feeling that Flanker2 is somewhat of an incomplete product in its planned form of release. Thankfully, there are already plans to improve on the deficiencies with an add-on in Su-39. If this second simulation includes a dynamic campaign and moving ground forces, Flanker2 may yet be the new standard that many of us are hoping for.