BMS Interview 2023 - The Sim That Keeps Delivering

An interview with Max Waldorf from the BMS team. To give some light on how they think their game fits in the simulation niche and where things can go forward.
►Discord: / discord
►Patreon: / enigma89
►Merch: enigma-72.creator-spring.com/
Chapters
00:00 Intro
09:06 The Sim Landscape
17:56 Relationship with Falcon 4.0
19:48 Recent Development
27:48 F-15 & Other Jets
43:03 Measuring Sucess
49:17 Future Development
57:38 Being a Custodian of Simming
01:11:03 Free Discussion
01:20:49 Outro
Outro Music:
• Synthwave / Retrowave ...
Screenshot for thumbnail from Chip from the BMS Discord
Patreon Shoutout to my most major patreon supporters who helps makes these videos possible:
RS Hart
Squidder Brother
Nineball
Kolovar
Charlie
Text Block for Algo:
enigma,enigma89,bms interview,max waldorf,max bms,max waldorf BMS,enigma bms interview,bms 4.38,bms 4.37,bms 2023,bms interview 2023
This channel focuses on combat flight simulators like DCS World and IL-2 Great Battles. If you play either of these games or flight simulators like Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 and enjoy aviation and dogfighting then this channel is for you. Even if you are coming from War Thunder and BF2042, you can learn to fly these combat flight simulators.
I play using TrackIR5 and do not use VR, this means that I am able to capture footage for tutorials, how-to-guides and other multiplayer tips and tricks video in 1440p.
Eagle Dynamics has made it easier than ever to learn DCS because the game is technically free. The game has the F-15, F-16, Su-27, Mig-29, Mig-21, Mig-19, Mig-15, F-86 Sabre, Jf-17, Mirage 2000, F-18 Hornet and F-14 Tomcat. There are soon other modules coming such as the Mig-23 and F-4. Lastly, there are helicopters like the Mi-24 Hind and AH-64 Apache.
The same is also true for IL-2 Great Battles. With Battle of Stalingrad, Battle of Kuban, Battle of Bodenplatte, Battle of Moscow and Battle of Normandy being released, there is an immense amount of variety covered. The Bf-109, Fw-190, P-51, Tempest, P-47, Mc.202, Stuka, Ju-88, He-111, and so on are all in the game. I focus on making videos to make that part accessible so you can dive into IL-2 Multiplayer.

[@Enigma89]

BMS is the most complete sim experience that you can have, if you aren't playing it then you are simply missing out. www.falcon-bms.com/

[@CaptainBiggles.]

Is Falcon BMS a free game?

[@Rio_de_Risco]

@@CaptainBiggles. just have to buy falcon 4 which is almost free

[@Enigma89]

@@CaptainBiggles. You have to buy Falcon 4.0 which is like $5 on steam.

[@CaptainBiggles.]

@@Enigma89 rgr

[@imaginarybaron5864]

I liked the “dad gaming” line of discussion. BMS is actually a sim that is very respectful of your time. You can start each mission on the runway ready to takeoff. Transit times are generally reasonable in the KTO. DTC for easy mission planning. The campaign readily saves your progress. I contrast this to DCS which is a sim that is very disrespectful of your time (both in design of the sim and in the multiplayer community). Virtually every server insists on cold starts. Many have long transit times. Even the auto starts are slow and often miss key steps (like turning on RWR). As a parent it’s just easier to spend limited gaming time in BMS vs DCS.

[@AviationPlus]

In my opinion. The crowd that we are starting to get now are NEW people who are barely into flight sims so have very little knowledge in general aviation or even combat aviation. Wanting to fly alone and kick butt but not know what an ICP is or how to use bullseye. Everyone has their way to play a game but there is a limit to the amount of stuff to complain about, not good to complain about not knowing something when one does not even know where the manuals are or even using KZbin. Thanks for sharing see ya around.

[@jakobc.2558]

BMS is such a hidden gem. It so wild that the original Falcon 4.0 game was made in 1998 and BMS has been alive and thriving ever since.

[@JethroRose]

F4 was a gem back in the day as well, but the standards were lower :) the fact the dynamic campaign ran on a pentium 2 pretty damn well back in the early 2000s and that DCS doesn't even have a campaign engine in 2023 is a bit of a joke. I do play DCS, but.... its missing so much

[@BunialskiTrip]

BMS is the best! This interview is exactly what I needed.😊

[@AchrafAMINE]

12 months from now, enigma gathered a team, remade all the cold war planes, then moved the server to bms 😅

[@aviinl1]

Only discovered BMS a couple days ago, how have i missed this all my life, what an underrated project

[@nigelmorris4769]

Same here.. I only found it as I was after a SIM with a harrier I can fly and shoot.. and it's free... Excluding the steam falcon 4 purchase for pennies compared to dcs aircraft...

[@gradocchio]

Great interview! Max, considering Falcon 4.0 was released for sale (in CT, USA anyway) on my 44th birthday in 1998 you are not quite one of the "old guys" ... 🤣

[@simgaminglife4392]

Hello, this is D3m1aN, a BMS/DCS video cinematographer/creator and i would like to congratulate you for uploading this very educating and informative interview. Honestly, i admire Max Waldorf for his transparency ,clarity and joyful-happiness oriented drive behind BMS building, rather than a money driven and number chasing team that prioritizes themselves more than their fans. I myself share equal passion and a lot of hard work behind every one of my cinematics/movies and i assure you after this interview i want to focus even more on BMS content. I guess thats my way of contributing to this great project called BMS and showcasing as much as possible its beauty to the world watching. Cannot wait for 4.38 so that i can create majestic videos ! Peace everyone!

[@mro9466]

BMS, Nascar 2003, Richard Burns Rally, FSX, IL2 1946

[@RogueBeatsARG]

GP Legends

[@Hiuuz]

M1 Tank Platoon II

[@seancummings7788]

Good interview. I think what is also important to understand is the flight sim industry and the history over the years. Some of the first games on PC were flight sims. Microsoft being one of them. The golden era of PC flight sims went from mid 80s to well into the 90s but the model at that time wasn't sustainable and so we saw a massive drop off in sims. It wasn't really viable to spend years developing a title in the hopes that it would do well at $40.00 for a game. It was right around the time when subscription based games became a thing as well. So the model had to shift into what we have now. IL2 was the first to make the move to releasing additional modules planes and maps. The Falcon story is pretty amazing with all the different versions once the source was released on the web. I've been a Falcon fan since Falcon 3 and now BMS. It's a little shocking to see it continue to be developed and I'm grateful for the team that is carrying the torch.

[@Sgubby]

Awesome little interview. Thanks to you for documenting this, and thanks to Max for all the hard work he and the team put into this amazing sim.

[@LeoH3L1]

Agree, DCS is heading towards just being a more difficult war thunder.

[@r4dio4ctiv3man9]

DCS at least offers accurate avionics for every single aircraft in the sim, wich is the absolute minimum a sim has to offer. While BMS uses copy/paste F-16 avionics for everything, except for the F-15C.

[@jukahri]

@@r4dio4ctiv3man9 DCS offers widely varying levels of fidelity for its various aircraft, you can't possibly claim it offers accurate avionics for ALL its aircraft (Hello Flaming Clifffs?). Nevertheless nobody in their right mind would try and argue DCS isn't a sim, so I don't see in what capacity you could make that claim of BMS :D

[@r4dio4ctiv3man9]

@@jukahri True. Of course i meant the full fidelity aircraft. FC is not realy something i count to DCS, even though it is part of the sim. FC3 are entry level aircraft to draw beginners to DCS. The Avionics of the FF modules are accurate (at least that´s what the SME´s say) thus not complete in the EA modules. My exaggeration was related to the original comment, DCS heading towards beeing a more difficult war thunder. I played Falcon since 3.0 and until BMS 4.34 before switching to DCS. I know it´s a sim and what a good one when it comes to the F-16, dynamic campaign, ATC and a few other details. But i also know it has several significant shortcomings, including some engine related ones wich will most likely never be solved (and i´m not talking about graphics as that is just the cherry on top in any PC game). I.e. no proper radar logic, with the radar realy scanning the airspace/terrain in front of you, instead of having the sim doing some vooodoo magic to calculate if your radar should see the bandit or not and then displays the result on the scope. Very different in DCS as it features accurate radar logic. I.e. user placed objects do actually appear with correct radar shadow on a ground mapping radar image. That´s something the BMS engine is just uncapable of and will always be.

[@chadswindell6924]

@@r4dio4ctiv3man9 the argument of DCS being a more difficult war thunder is more geared toward the actual content that is worth playing. I'm not sure why you are saying anything about BMS and their systems but I think everyone agrees that the full fidelity modules in DCS are phenomenal. The problem is the content. I've been playing DCS since 2015 (when FC3 and the A-10 were really the only modules in the game), and the content is just lacking. The multiplayer space truly feels like war thunder (a bunch of people on either side not cooperating and simply going to try to kill random things on the other side), except "more difficult" because the planes are technically harder to learn/fly. That's OP's argument; they were not comparing war thunder/BMS systems to DCS, but the content within.

[@pancakeoperator]

Good video Enigma, appreciate the content your releasing for the BMS community.

[@slowhornet4802]

well, the video sucked, but the audio was great 😛

[@Dogface1984]

Ok I’m sold, got BMS

[@IronDuke39]

It's just also how deep the F16 is simulated in BMS is just unbelievable, no hate on the F16 in DCS but it's still very far away from the BMS lvl.

[@mro9466]

DCS could reach this level of simulation. Sadly ED and its 3rd parties are too busy making 5000 modules 😮‍💨

[@EbonySeraphim]

@@mro9466 it’s boggles my mind to see responses with a tone like this; even in the face of the clear trade off. You like apples, great. Apples are good, and some people prefer them over oranges. Leave the oranges alone, and orange lovers. BMS is very interesting to me. Despite some other stuff that it lacks, if there was a more easily available and open server environment, even if it was just A2G with F-16 as the only plane, I would play it. I’m not as motivated to engage in BMS for dynamic campaign single player, or super involved(niche?) groups that put together MP missions. That’s just me though; I’m sure for most players that prefer BMS the opposite is true.

[@gotanon9659]

​@@mro9466 they cant lol

[@b0bl00i]

I like the BMS Viper, but it need updated sounds. The sound pack for the DCS Viper is great.

[@b0bl00i]

@@mro9466 Exactly. I said this 1000 times by now. Stop spending time on modules and focus on the simulation instead. It's like a sandbox.

[@thebiggestoneyouveverhad]

I'm glad this came up in my feed. I had no idea they were implementing vr which is something that would make me want to try again....

[@Enigma89]

VR is in as of 4.37 so try it out

[@Roolenstein]

Doing the reading/study/research is part of the appeal of BMS. It's a great portal to real military aviation knowledge.

[@flightpowersims3299]

MicroProse re-acquired the copyright to the falcon series games!

[@warrencantero]

Can't thank you enough for this... it was very interesting to learn about the mindset and story of these developers who have done a bang up job on this Classic.

[@Enigma89]

You are welcome thanks for listneing.

[@ghost2031]

Thanks for this nice interview. Really enjoyed it.

[@Enigma89]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@Why485]

Shoutout to chihirobelmo!

[@Ripper669]

You can do PvP now in BMS. We do TvTs all the time that have groups of players flying in both sides inside the dynamic campaign. In BMS Hornet, Harrier, A10, tornado, viggen and mig29 have custom cockpits. They do use the viper avionics but that doesn't stop you from flying them. You can also fly red or blue in regular campaigns. I have flown an entire Korea campaign as a 29 pilot in NK.

[@Enigma89]

My understanding of this is that the avionics are all f16 in those Redfor planes? I have been wanting to do pvp in bms but i waited because I've been a bit busy lately and i wasn't sure if the planes were Frankenstein planes or not

[@herveledref8187]

We cannot thank enough the team of volunteers who make BMS the best military flight simulator. The development of additional tools such as Weapon delivery planner, Mission Commander, weather commander are incredible and add even more realism.

[@clerie]

Enigma's channel icon never fails to unnerve me. Who is this man? Why does his hat look like Johnny's from Guilty Gear? Why does his right cheek have a massive bulbous growth? Why are his teeth so big and white? Is that a shadow on his index finger, or a painted nail? This figure looks familiar, recognizable almost, and yet I have never seen him before. He is like the modern day This Man, reported to have appeared in many people's dreams. Except, I keep forgetting why he appears (assuming he does), leaving behind only a lingering nostalgia, a faint sense of apprehension that something is not right. I recall a green-tiled bathroom with a single dim, flickering lightbulb. It only has Darlie toothpaste to brush my teeth with; a brand I hated because of how fiercely it burned. Its logo was a smiling man in a hat, just like Enigma. His is not the smile of someone who merely enjoys flying digital cold war planes. It is too wide, too unnatural. It is the smile I forced in class yearbook photos. The kind of smile that appears in the transition from one stage to the next, an ephemeral smile; a mask worn at will. There is something hauntingly liminal about the Enigma icon, and the thought that it was merely something he designed or commissioned with no intent to unnerve behind it makes me feel so unbearably alone.

[@ActionScripter]

Hardest hitting comment 2023

[@bird.9346]

It reminds me of the phantom of the opera mask

[@Stickers96]

Pretty sure it's just Jim Carrey from The Mask slamming a dirty boy with no olive.

[@christopherbazaka1564]

rt

[@BunialskiTrip]

I love BMS even if I suck.

[@gokalptopyan6770]

F-15 in BMS sound good, i'm sure there is a lot of hard work involved but for me its another high tech machine. Learning all F-16 systems daunting already. I wish there is F-5 in BMS somewhat close to DCS model. It's my favourite plane, it's so simple and fun to fly. But because of sandbox gameplay of DCS, i am not flying as much as i hope to. I think F-5 and Mig-19 (or mig-21?) in BMS ColdWar pvp setting would be so much interesting.

[@brandonproctor3639]

How the hell have i never heard of this?!? Looks fantastic! (DCS f-16 pilot)

[@Enigma89]

You should really check it out. BMS is the best experience for modern day flying, DCS doesn't even compare.

[@b0bl00i]

Did you pick it up and tested it?

[@r4dio4ctiv3man9]

@@Enigma89 BMS uses F-16 avionics to emulate the F/A-18 Hornet. You call that simulator level? That is like calling Forza Horizon a racing sim. How can this be the best experince in modern day flying for someone prefering the legacy Hornet? Please explain...

[@speed150mph]

I’m an F/A-18 guy through and through, so I’m not really interested in switching to BMS until their hornet surpasses DCS. Still this was very interesting to watch and I hope they keep going with it.

[@kurt120032002]

To be fair. I am not a big fan of pushing graphics on this sim. It's main strenght is what is under the hood, not how it looks, specially since the VR impact of better graphics will be significant. . If I could have just one thing done for the next version, I would say more stuff done on the F 15, but not because it is the F15, but because it is the first plane to have it's own avionics. I don't think we actually need a huge number of planes, what we got is fine, we just need refinement for the planes we got planes. Anyway, outstanding work guys. Best developers out there.

[@networkgeekstuff9090]

1:05:00 - +1 on this one with kids, returned to BMS and VTOL VR for single player and WT for multiplayer simply because DCS/Il2 community campaigns requires basically several continuous hours to have any meaning.

[@johnwicks4936]

You might want to have him back on to discuss the outstanding new news from MicroProse!

[@Enigma89]

I know i was just thinking that

[@thebiggestoneyouveverhad]

Looking at this now, makes you wonder if they knew about the Microprose acquisition? Maybe they couldn't talk about it yet?...

[@GODenWord]

IL 2 1946 game has dynamic campaing for many countries such as USSR, USA, Germany, Japan, England and etc. Alot o fun. Maybew i am wrong but this is the first flight sim which implemented dymanic capaing mode.

[@jukahri]

Red Baron 2 had a dynamic campaign back in '97, and of course Falcon 4 in '98.

[@jukahri]

Red Baron 2 had a dynamic campaign back in '97, and of course Falcon 4 in '98.

[@GODenWord]

@@jukahri It is not who is first. It is who done it right. Stevie Jobs.

[@user-br3rk3su6b]

Guys when i play alone the game works but i wanted to steam this game and it lags. Is my computer to crappy?😢

[@fa-ajn9881]

TLDR FOR EVERYONE: Falcon BMS Unreal 5 release early 2024!

[@vyrag0]

I love Fuckin' Four.

[@solonemanuelwhitetigernava571]

Do you have some news about Falcon 5.0...?

[@Enigma89]

I know as much as you do about it

[@dasdguy7606]

Hi Max. Old guy here. Still a user.

[@RogueBeatsARG]

The only bad thing about BMS is the visuals but it looks like that will be fixed soon

[@zorn2017]

graphics snobs be liek:

[@RogueBeatsARG]

@@zorn2017 graphics are important in sims since the point of a sim is immersion, BMS about to get new terrain engine and PBR tho

[@drafura]

@@RogueBeatsARG No, the point of sims is realism, immersion comes next

[@jrfirefiher]

graphics arent that bad

[@RogueBeatsARG]

@@jrfirefiher nah, honestly its ok i think, dont know for today standars but, old sims are better than newer ones in every other aspect

[@molnibalage83]

36:12 It would be just a painful experience. Even against an F-16A or F-15A would be a hopeless quest to fight. Just try with current F-16s avionics which means totally over modeled plane. At best you need a DCS level of MiG-29 or Su-27 to have any real enjoyable experience against Cold War US planes. Or MiG-23MLD. Just try to fight against a plane which have AIM-9L/M without dispensers...

[@stevenford6107]

Is multi-crew with 3D back seat possible? Is there no one in the team who is willing to fully implement F-16D?

[@mrcroa2564]

Not possible. And afaik this is not really planned. But as always it just need one guy interested to start coding it.

[@LooxJJ]

I got here because, for a moment, I thought you were interviewing a member of BTS...oh, wait...

[@user-br3rk3su6b]

Can you add F117A to the game? Plese!!!🥰

[@Boomproof]

I would rather compare BMS, or rather Falcon 4.0 due to it's age with something like 688 (I): Hunter/Killer, and DCS to MSFS - these are, respectively, much closer to eachother in concept. On one hand you have 2 campaign-driven games with enfuriatingly good AI, and on the other hand you have 2 sandboxes. Both BMS and 688 (I) are great sims of their own environments, they excel at what they do. In the sub game you can only command Los Angeles class subs, just like you are limited to the F-16 in Flacon 4.0 - coincidence? I am sure not. DCS and MSFS were not designed as "games" in the literal sense, but rather as physics engines to simulate aerodynamic models. In the first 4 minutes you can tell that Max was more interested in a sim that emphazises the challenge of completing your missions/scenarios, more than he was in flying different machines. BMS is a more accurate war simulator, as you feel blind and at a lack of information for the most part, as well as getting ambushed and surprised with tactics (sleeper SAMs waiting for you to get into their NEZ, low flying MIGs) whereas DCS is more of a frankenstein, in the good sense. One game has emphasis on AI and the feeling of blindness amidst a war environment, the challenge of coming out alive from an encounter. The other focuses on diversity - propeller machines, turbofans, jet engines and helicopters, including more or less crude ground vehicles and some navy - just missing submarines at this point. It is like comparing GTA Online to Arma 3, just because both take place in open maps and allow for First-Person and Third-Person perspectives, even though they share nothing in common besides the fact that you can use guns/vehicles in both; The games are similar but not comparable. Heck, in DCS you can use nukes for crying out loud. If at any point ED decides to put work into revamping the AI and making it so that it has conclusive objectives, then there would be a reason to compare DCS and BMS. Remove a bit more of the predictability, adopt some crazy smart AIs of which there are many interesting ones and simplify avionics for these: bob's your uncle. I suppose that right now, the AI in DCS needs to maneuver the plane just like a player does, and due to computing limitations it feels very, very stupid/unintelligent. Surely BMS does some computing magic to avoid simulating the avionics for each individual object rendered, else there wouldnt be computing power for the decision-making part of the AI. I wish for a day where we could merge 688 Hunter/Killer for the naval aspect/simulation, Falcon 4.0 AI and campaign system and DCS visuals and vehicle variety.

[@samnwakefield2032]

Falcon bms f16 is wayyy superior than the one from dcs....the only thing is the f16 sound that aint that great....i downloaded a mod for the f16 sound and now it sounds like the real thing.

[@b0bl00i]

I would be very happy if you can provide me with a working high quality f-16 sound mod for BMS. That is my main annoyance at the moment.

[@samnwakefield2032]

@@b0bl00i they actually removed it idk why...from the falcom bms community mods a while ago ...someone posted it and Now its gone!!...maybe they might be reworking a new sound mod.

[@b0bl00i]

@@samnwakefield2032 Ah, what a shame. I guess I wait 😀

[@solonemanuelwhitetigernava571]

ED monopoly needs to be broken...unless me...i'm still waiting for a great DCS competitor....

[@user-yn5oj3yy9y]

The criminals at Bethesda need to offer these guys insane salaries to teach them how to code.....

[@ryu1940]

Gawd I want a lot of gameplay features in this for DCS.

[@b0bl00i]

Dcs is good looking and sounding Sim but there's nothing to do other than air quaking. Ai is horrible and atc is crap. No dynamic campaign and the f16 flight model is way just wrong.

[@ryu1940]

@@b0bl00i it’s funny I play DCS online 100% of the time and I don’t airquake 🤷‍♂️

[@mro9466]

@@ryu1940 you can, but the other aspects of the sim are still lacking.

[@themastrofall]

Wish it had helicopters

[@Masteroftee]

Hardest thing in bms is to bind all keys and axis

[@ptnnnnn197]

You don't need to bind everything? And the axis are not hard either?

[@gkky_]

Or just bind the HOTAS keys, since the point of HOTAS is to manage most of the things you'll need to manage while flying without taking your hands off the controls, and for everything else you have a clickable cockpit

[@stevenford6107]

Latest version comes with alternative launcher which make binding easy. Installing and updating also become very streamlined

[@AchrafAMINE]

With the alternative launcher, it's become as easy as in dcs

[@b0bl00i]

that's not true :D it takes quite some effort and practice to successfully fly the campaign. but learning all that is fun!

[@thomasmaier7053]

BMS is best, fk the rest!

[@falconbmstutorials6496]

Dude, that is not true. I love BMS, but I will definitively give DCS a try when they finally implement Vulkan, Multiprocessor (the final stage, not the simple one now) AND dynamic campaigns in 2078.

[@Altrote100]

@@falconbmstutorials6496 🤣🤣

[@MultiVeeta]

I hate these kinds of attitudes they are so childish like ps v Xbox kids. I've played Falcon for 20 years and I find it no more difficult than DCS. Recently a lot of classified features have been made up into unrealistic features. DCS is a fantastic simulator that has a lot pros over BMS. Yeah a DC is amazing but it's a game feature, the simulation is in the operation of aircraft and operating Hornets, Tomcats and Harriers off Super carrier is amazingly well simulated. Just appreciate that having 2 fantastic simulators is a dream.

[@EbonySeraphim]

Why does this interviewer, at multiple points, feel the need to take digs at DCS. There are a couple of times the dev tried to show the universal reality of development- both priorities and limits. Then when the dev specifically says something that negatively is true of BMS the interviewer pretends it applies to all games generically? Bias much? I don’t think normal people understood how he answered and addressed the flight modeling behavior being applied to other planes. What people heard is “we can do anything” - what I heard: “we can produce a good enough result for anything.” I believe that is true but that is a revealing difference. The core flight model in BMS at the core is meant to serve the F-16. That they have tables based on altitudes, speeds, etc are known conditions to influence the F-16 and similar planes (jets). What happens for a plane that has flight characteristics based on propeller torque? Main rotor blade torque versus air temperature? Engine fuel mixtures and temperature? If all it impacts is total thrust output, roll rate, lift, etc BMS team can force fit it into the single model otherwise they need new code - like was said in the interview and that’s a considerable work. I work in software; I did gamedev as a hobby; I specifically enjoyed input -> world simulation modeling.

[@MaxWaldorf]

I think you're going way beyond the scope of this interview... Never pretended that we can model anything but in the context of the F-16, you would be looking for jet like controllable planes. Since you know what software dev is, you understand the concept of ensuring quality over quantity by scoping your code to a target subset of planes types. There is no interest right now to go into the real of rotors and props... Others do that better and we don't have the workforce for it... Thanks for listening