=38=Tatarenko Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 (edited) From Loft: the beta testers will test multiplayer right after the holidays and we will get it as soon as they say it's OK. Source And other news - rather than make new missions, they are already preparing the QMB Source 2 IL-2 rear gunner: LaGG-3 Trimmer: From End of Feb Han says: Multiplayer basically ready and working, just sorting the interface out now. Source Edited January 3, 2014 by =38=Tatarenko 9
=38=Tatarenko Posted January 4, 2014 Author Posted January 4, 2014 More: No infantry. Source Burning tanks will burn for 300 seconds (5 min) Source They will then stay as wrecks for 15 minutes Source 7
=38=Tatarenko Posted January 4, 2014 Author Posted January 4, 2014 (edited) Following from here: Aircraft mod weapon weight affects flight, as does fuel expended. Expended ammunition weight currently not modelled but will be. Il-2's (etc) will have general purpose bombs from the beginning but can unlock extra types of ammo/rockets. First multiplayer missions will be simple dogfights. La-5 still early WIP FANTASTIC NEWS: Not official but I-16 very likely in 2014. There will be 2-3 early access multiplayer servers with different realism settings and missions Another La-5 shot (definitely Series 8) Shock wave effects have been turned off (bombs) while work is done on the atmosphere (weather?) Separate bomb and rocket buttons will come when the IL-2 is released to EA. Edited January 4, 2014 by =38=Tatarenko 14
J4SCrisZeri Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 thank you Tatarenko for making this day (without the usual diary), still a good day filled with excellent news! 2
Volkoff Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 (edited) thank you Tatarenko for making this day (without the usual diary), still a good day filled with excellent news! +1 Yes, great job filling in today! MJ p.s. The I-16 news is very interesting. They are finally going to get that thing out of the ROF museum and into the sim air, eh? Cool... MJ Edited January 4, 2014 by =69.GIAP=MIKHA 1
Mags Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 I just woke up this morning and read this. Thank you, Tatarenko.
von_Sales Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 thx for posting that, looking forward to multiplayer....
Endy Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 This is fantastic, it's getting better every week. [As we knew it would].
ST_ami7b5 Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 Thanks for the news! Would be happy to fly I-16 1
Lextor Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 (edited) Why you guys want I-16 so badly? Explain to noob simmer please)) This aircraft should be worse than LaGG-3, isn't it? Edited January 4, 2014 by Lextor
LLv24_Zami Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 Thanks for news! They should post these things to the english forums also
=38=Tatarenko Posted January 4, 2014 Author Posted January 4, 2014 (edited) Why you guys want I-16 so badly? Explain to noob simmer please)) This aircraft should be worse than LaGG-3, isn't it? Have you no soul? Thanks. Thanks everyone for the nice comments! They should post these things to the english forums also They are answers to questions asked. Also, they know the posters on the Russian forum and often they're talking to their mates so it's natural there's a different type of relationship. They're writing in their own language as well. But they also have the same kind of trolls, silly arguments and (justified) threats of bans that we have over here. As well as the obligatory "well if you're so clever build your own flight sim and I'll buy it". But in general the Russians are asking much better questions (in greater technical detail too). Edited January 4, 2014 by =38=Tatarenko 2
BeastyBaiter Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 Why you guys want I-16 so badly? Explain to noob simmer please)) This aircraft should be worse than LaGG-3, isn't it? The I-16 was still in widespread use at the time, so it makes sense from that standpoint. Not everyone is obsessed with flying the "best" plane all the time. If they were, the MP servers would be Bf-109F4 vs Bf-109F4 without anything else from the current confirmed lineup, not even the La-5 or Fw-190A3 would make it. With that said, the I-16 does have some advantages. It should be able to out turn/roll a Bf-109F4, something the LaGG-3 cannot do. It is slower than both of course, but it does gain one solid advantage in exchange. A good pilot can make use of that. I'd actually be more interested in the I-153P or MiG-3 tbh.
=38=Tatarenko Posted January 4, 2014 Author Posted January 4, 2014 (edited) The I-16 was still in widespread use at the time, so it makes sense from that standpoint. Not everyone is obsessed with flying the "best" plane all the time. If they were, the MP servers would be Bf-109F4 vs Bf-109F4 without anything else from the current confirmed lineup, not even the La-5 or Fw-190A3 would make it. With that said, the I-16 does have some advantages. It should be able to out turn/roll a Bf-109F4, something the LaGG-3 cannot do. It is slower than both of course, but it does gain one solid advantage in exchange. A good pilot can make use of that. I'd actually be more interested in the I-153P or MiG-3 tbh. Yes having one distinct advantage can often be enough. But mainly it looks cool and is fun to fly BTW the I-153P wasn't a "real" plane. Only 8 examples were built for testing. Thanks for the news Ian! Bitte sehr Herr Oberleutnant Edited January 4, 2014 by =38=Tatarenko
Lextor Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 Have you no soul? I'm an atheist, so probably not, lol)) Moreover, i'm Russian, but I think that I-16 is the ugliest plane ever. It seems to me that its cartoonish look doesn't match with streamlined proportions of coeval German planes. Anyway, it's just my opinion, peace))
yeikov Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 Thank you! The I-16 news, even if not official, made me jump from my chair. But you're all wrong, the I-16 did not have one distinct advantage but two: without canopy you're always ready to bail out!! It's as if they already knew what was coming to them, those clever engineers... 1
=38=Tatarenko Posted January 4, 2014 Author Posted January 4, 2014 Also an atheist (isn't everyone??) and you're right, it isn't streamlined but it's beautiful! I suppose it's the same reason I prefer my Toyota jeep over a shiny sports car.Toyota on Hardknott Pass by Ian_Boys, on Flickr
Lextor Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 Also an atheist (isn't everyone??) and you're right, it isn't streamlined but it's beautiful! I suppose it's the same reason I prefer my Toyota jeep over a shiny sports car. I think the cars have different aesthetics. As for aircraft, I always liked elongated, rapid, lightweight form. For example, I enjoy Tu-160. But I-16 is similar to a tree stump, or a boot. It's cute, but not beautiful, I'm sorry.
hiro Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 thanks for the compilation . .. If the I-16 is anything like the one in the original, it's quite a handful. That thing could just skate around and I'd wait until a 109 was in the 200 m range and lighting up and it was nimble enough to get out of the way. If I saw a BnZ'er coming down, the I-16 could evade the line of fire or even turn into a head on. Then they'd get impatient and try one turn to get another quick snapshot, but turns are like tequila, you let one of them in and he / she brings all their friends and the I-16 wins out after 2 or 3, even one.
Lextor Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 I just came up with something. To put it metaphorically, when thinking about the Soviet Air Force in general, I-16 is an ugly duckling, which in the end turned into a beautiful swan) I (in Russia Tu-160 is nicknamed "White Swan")
unreasonable Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 I remember the last time my girlfriend caught me playing around with the I-16 in she said "Oh that plane is so cute!" Mind you her favourite character in Lord of the Rings (the movie) was Gollum. 3
SYN_Ricky Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 From Black Cross/Red Star Volume 3: "During the course of 1942, the old rugged Polikarpov I-16, which had constituted the backbone of the Soviet fighter force in June 1941, was largely phased out from front line service. In the summer of 1942, only two of 4VA's (air army) fighter regiments still were equipped with aircraft of this type. But the I-16 still had several advantages, not only its almost unbeatable maneuverability. According to a report issued by 88IAP on 19 June 1942, the I-16 had proved itself to be one of the most endurable among the domestically produced aircraft. The report pointed out a number of cases where 88 IAP's I-16d had been able to return to base despite heavy battle damage.... By June 1942, some of 88 IAP's I-16s had been in service since the first day of the war, in some cases they had undergone repairs on twelve occasions - and were still flying." 1
Zmaj76 Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 (edited) Why you guys want I-16 so badly? Explain to noob simmer please)) This aircraft should be worse than LaGG-3, isn't it? Some experienced simmers usually like uderdog planes as they add more challenge into simming in MP.....An I16 was indeed (more or less) an obsolete plane by the time of german invasion but it was very maneuverable plane. And I dont think its ugly.... Edited January 4, 2014 by Tvrdi
gx007 Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 Good news indeed. The I-16 was one of my favorites in WT. They modeled it well (imo) for what WT represents. And yes, a nice little stubby fighter to tempt noobs into small alleyway knife fights.
=RvE=Windmills Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 (edited) Have you no soul? Thanks everyone for the nice comments! They are answers to questions asked. Also, they know the posters on the Russian forum and often they're talking to their mates so it's natural there's a different type of relationship. They're writing in their own language as well. But they also have the same kind of trolls, silly arguments and (justified) threats of bans that we have over here. As well as the obligatory "well if you're so clever build your own flight sim and I'll buy it". But in general the Russians are asking much better questions (in greater technical detail too). I think we'd ask more intricate and technical questions if there was any indication there might be someone answering. Only Blacksix replies every now and then in the questions thread, but as a community manager it seems his knowledge of the technical stuff we're most interested in is limited. If you exclude his replies there haven't been any real answers in months. Sure there's some tidbits here and there, but I'd really like to see some more effort to interact with the English speaking community. I greatly appreciate you bringing us this information, but it's not really how this should go. Edited January 4, 2014 by iLOVEwindmills
Emgy Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 (edited) . If you exclude his replies there haven't been any real answers in months.. They have said that answers are posted in the dev diaries, if they are able to answer the question. For instance the question about IL2 weapon unlocks were answered some weeks ago with graphics showing the Lagg and IL2 unlock paths. For day to day forum interaction, there are practical issues with needing someone to translate questions to Russian and answers to English. And thanks Tatarenko for the translations :-) Edited January 4, 2014 by Calvamos
Jaws2002 Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 (edited) Multiplayer and QMB.... Thanks Tatarenko. Edited January 4, 2014 by Jaws2002
dburne Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 (edited) Fwiw, multiplayer and QMB were discussed in DD46 and stated it would be available in perhaps in Jan: "Overall development goes well. We're working on 2 game modes at the moment; A Quick Mission Builder (mission generator) that would give you the tools and simple interface to create your own scenarios; and Multiplayer so you can play with others. Both modes will be added to early access program shortly after the Christmas and New Year holiday. " I tend to agree with iLOVEwindmills though, the questions to developers thread does not seem to be getting much attention in getting them answered as they used to - I am sure they are busy with what they are doing now as well though. Edited January 4, 2014 by dburnette
Brano Posted January 4, 2014 Posted January 4, 2014 LaGG trim only at the end of february? VVS has one underdog fighter available now and without possibility to trim.LW has all aces at hand.I think this face is apropriate...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now