Jump to content

Fritz_X

Members
  • Content Count

    94
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Fritz_X

  1. Just launch the game like you always did (the launcher you used for Kuban), open the QMB (quick mission builder) and select a map and mission type you want to fly. The two FC planes that have been added so far show up in the plane list among your Kuban planes. So far the only FC content that has been added are two planes (SPAD XIII & Fokker Dr.1) and all their customizations (like additional cross hairs, streamers, handguns, etc.). Over the course of time eight more planes and a Western front WWI map of the Arras sector will be added.
  2. To add a little more to my initial post, here's a short list of how I feel like the planes could be delivered the best way: 1. SPAD XIII & Fokker Dr.1 Done! 2. Sopwith Camel & Fokker D.VII As stated in my first post, this would be a very good way to immediately create two very competitive match-ups (SPAD XIII vs. Fokker D.VII(F) / Sopwith Camel vs. Fokker Dr. 1). 3. Bristol Fighter & Halberstadt CL.II Two-seaters for both opposing forces, giving players the opportunity to share a single plane and try out gunnery positions. 4. S.E.5.a & Albatros D.Va Again a pair of fighters, two work horses of WWI. 5. Sopwith Dolphin & Pfalz D.IIIa The last two fighters, the kind of 'odd ones' this time around. Please consider that this list is just something that popped out of my mind, but I just feel that this release schedule would be the best one. Of course it would only work if they keep sticking to releasing the planes in pairs throughout the whole development cycle. Do you guys agree or have a better idea?
  3. Design-wise my favorite WWI plane by far! Nice screenshots!
  4. I agree, but only on the Sopwith Camel. For the Central Powers I'd hope they go for the Fokker D.VII as the second plane. That would give us two highly comparable match-ups, namely SPAD vs. Fokker D.VII and Camel vs. Dr.1. For the third batch of planes I'd like to see a two-seater for each side. Whatever the devs will deliver next, it'll definitely be nothing but amazing. Ps.: The Nieuport 28 didn't make it into FC Vol.1.
  5. Very nice review! Unfortunately the Nieuport 17 didn't make it into FC Vol. 1, which is a bummer to me as well. Hopefully it will show up in Vol. 2, if we get one.
  6. Not quite sure if my eyes were playing tricks on me, but from what I've seen there actually might be an animation for fleeing crew members in the game. When I tried TC for the first time, I attacked a German convoy in a KV-1, ignoring a mobile German flak nearby. As the flak kept hitting and disabling my tank (lost my right track), I switched to external view and witnessed how an animated soldier seemingly emerged from my tank and threw himself on the ground after running a few feet. At first I thought the soldier could be a German escaping from one of the vehicles of the convoy I attacked, but when a second soldier showed up, it definitely looked like he was coming directly out of my tank. After switching back to internal view I still could man all the positions though... So I might be wrong, afterall.
  7. Hello and welcome to the world of IL-2 Great Battles! I hope you'll be enjoying your time. To answer your question: No, when it comes to raw content, 1946 even without any mods installed is the winner by far. And even if there is more and very diverse content to come for the Great Battles series (new late war WWII planes in Bodenplatte, ground warfare in Tank Crew, WWI air combat in Flying Circus), I still feel that the series won't ever catch up with 1946 content wise. But apart from this, IL-2 Great Battles is the superior product in each and every way. Graphics, sound, physics, the feeling of 'being there', especially when using VR, just every aspect is improved compared with 1946. Don't get me wrong, classic IL-2 was a great product. When it was released back on 2001, it was way ahead of its' time, putting Microsoft's CFS series to shame and rest with ease. I started playing the game with its' very first iterarion, I was 14 years old back then. I followed the game through all of its' development cycle, finally ending with 1946 and beyond, when Team Daedalus kept working on it. I loved classic IL-2, there was no other flight simulation I enjoyed more. That means until IL-2 Battle of Stalingrad showed up. At the beginning, the game had its' fair share of problems and of course lacked a lot of content. But the continous development and the release of new planes and scenarios made the Great Battles series the fine piece of software it is today. I tried to go back to 1946 once. No matter how much I loved it, and no matter how hard you mod it, it just can't keep up any more. Still, it was a masterpiece once, that deserves a special spot in my childhood memories and in the hall of fame of flight simulation.
  8. Alrighty then! Even though I actually prefer the MG-151/20 in combination with the two 13mm MGs over the MK-108 on our current G14, I still hope they keep the 20mm cannon out of the K4, for historic accuracy's sake. Especially if they'd offer us a G10 as a collector's plane, which definitely would have an option for both cannon types.
  9. Beg a pardon, but in case of the K4 it is the MG-151/20 motor cannon that most likely won't show up as an option. The MK-108 will definitely be there, since it was the standard for the K4. In theory the MG-151/20 could have been installed in the K4 as well, the plane even came with the optional wiring to easily install the 20mm cannon. But so far I never saw any solid proof that the Luftwaffe actually made use of this.
  10. The big problem, and this has been mentioned before by many people, is that the AI handles every fighter the same way. They don't care about energy retention and go for turn fighting instead, which of course works fairly well with nimble planes like the I16 and the Spitfire Vb, but fails with types like the whole Bf 109 series. Unfortunately this kind of ruins the experience in the single player campaign no matter what side you are flying for: If you fly for the Soviets, battles with German fighters are too easy to win. The enemy tries to turnfight, it fails due to the type of plane they are flying, you shoot them down with relative ease. If you fly for the Luftwaffe, the fights become tougher for the player, since the enemy AI can now make a good use of its' turnfight tactic. What ruins the experience in this case though, is that your German AI wingmen are now failing to make an effective use of their fighters, which A) makes them often suffer from heavy losses (sometimes your whole squad gets killed on a mission, there is no way to get attached to your wingmen this way) and B) leads to an artificially high kill count for the player on the German side, making you feel like the only competent pilot of the Luftwaffe. I really hope that the team will be able to have a look into the AI at some point. I know this is quite something to ask for, but I feel like this could improve the SP experience alot.
  11. One more time: It's definitely there in single player. I crashed my plane just yesterday when flying a FW 190 A5 at high speed at tree top level, when being a little too optimistic with closely crossing an enemy Spitfire's path, losing control over my plane.
  12. @ Gordon200 I'm afraid you're mixing up two things right there. The 'add a game' option on Steam has always been there. The name is a little confusing, since it doesn't actually add games (or other software) to your Steam account. All it does is creating a short cut of the software you added to your local Steam library. If you run Steam on another machine or run Steam on the same computer after a fresh reinstall, said short cut won't show up there anymore. So even if you run the IL-2 launcher from the official website through Steam via the 'add a game' option, it has absolutely nothing to do with linking both accounts.
  13. Didn't you also suffer from problems with installing the latest update on your current install? I'm no technological mastermind, but I feel like getting the installer from somebody else is not going to solve your connection problem to the servers. Something is obviously blocking a proper connection to them. Did you change your router settings lately or did you install a new firmware for it? I feel like you should definitely have a look into your router settings (ports!).
  14. Strange, I never found any sources that suggest that the 20mm cannon ever being used on a K-4 in service. In case I was wrong, I suggest to ignore my initial comment about the armament.
  15. A difference between the two planes will be the cannon-armament: While in the G-14 you can choose between 20mm and 30mm cannon, the K-4 will only come with the latter MK-108.
  16. Thanks for the heads-up, Jason! Even though risking to sound like a smartass, I'd like to inform you, that P.S. stands for 'post scriptum', which basically translates to 'after script'. Which means that if you add another P.S., it has to be written as P.P.S, not P.S.S. It's the 'P' that gets added, not the 'S'. *smartass-mode deactivated* 😛
  17. The G-14 has been my favorite version of the 109 in the classic IL2, along with the G-10. What I've seen so far of the new addition immediately remembered me why. The plane is fast, has great all around visibility (for a 109, at least) and packs a punch with its' twin 13mm MGs. I prefer taking it out for a spin with the standard 20mm cannon setup, which goes really well with the MGs. Ultimately this most likely will be the reason why I'm gonna be prefering it over the K-4, which only comes with the MK-108 30mm cannon. Maybe we are lucky to get a G-10 as well someday, either as a collectors plane or as a part of another, maybe late war Eastern front expansion. Closer to the K-4, but with an option for a 20mm cannon. The only small gripe I currently have with the G-14 is a small part of the textures of the cockpit. I really feel like the 'holes' on the insides along the frame of the cockpit ceiling look rather unconvincing. They seem to be simply painted onto the frame, giving it a rather unrealistic look on my end. Maybe this happens just on my setup or because I am using the wrong settings, but I already have set the texture quality to the max. Has anyone else the feeling that this part of the cockpit texture could use a little make-over, or am I just being nit-picky here? Anyway, another awesome job by the developers. They never fail to impress. Ps.: The Spitfire Mk.IX even tops the G-14. But this is just me preferring Soviet and Allied planes in general.
  18. Is there a reason why you keep (falsly) claiming that we got the 25lb boost? You already said this in two other threads, being corrected by other users both times. Third time's a charm, maybe?
  19. Whaaaaaaaaaaaat?! I honestly had the feeling that you guys wouldn't give up on the Eastern Front, since it still bears alot of both early and late war potential. But I didn't expect one of you guys in charge to show up at this point and actually tell a few possibilities by name. I know that doesn't mean that new Eastern Front planes will show up anytime soon (except the Po-2 maybe), but you reassuring us that you still didn't give up on that scenario, even though you're working on Bodenplatte and the other two projects, plus having the strong desire to go to the Pacific scenario as well, is really appreciated. The 'classic' IL-2 is what introduced me into the air war over the Eastern Front back in 2001 and I really hope that you guys will find the time and funds to flesh it out in this latest installment of the best combat flight sim ever created.
  20. Since we were able to use every plane from every module on any map so far, even if it isn't fitting into the historical time frame, it seems to be very likely that we'll be able to fly Russian planes on the coming Western map and American planes on the maps we already have. Therefore we most likely won't be forced for the Bodenplatte map to be finished to try out the new rides. Of course this is just an educated guess, but it seems very plausible to me due to how things have been handled by the developers so far.
  21. You are right. But only in theory. The fact that we have an iron man mode trumps your argument. The whole existance of it is to give us the 'death = end of campaign' experience. If we want to. The OP clearly stated that he didn't want to go iron man, but is still facing the permanent end of his campaign after dying under certain circumstances. Seems like a rather legit and reasonable complaint to me and definitely nothing that deserves 'get used to it' style answers.
  22. Very good post, I wholeheartedly agree with everything you stated. This simulation is almost beyond great in about every aspect. The only thing that feels just way too unconvincing to me is the voice chatter on the radio, which sounds generic, robotic and often leads to confusion because your own pilot is actually talking on the radio as well. Maybe my memory is playing tricks on me, but I feel like the voice acting and the way the exclamations were put together was better executed in the classic installment of IL-2 (not talking about using voice-pack mods here, by the way). The only thing that bugged me there was that the voices sounded too clear, as if they were not using 1940's radio communication, but today's instead. But apart from that, everything else about the voice system was better: - your own pilot didn't speak - multiple voice actors per nation - more specific, useful information given - 'emotional' voices: When shooting down an enemy plane the pilots made joyful exclamations, when being shot down the fear in their voices actually sounded real when they announced to bail out. Especially liked when the AI warned friendlies, like saying 'You're on fire, bail out!'. It just felt more vivid and believable. I really don't want to sound ungrateful, which I feel I do right now. I'm sorry for that, since apart from this aspect I love this sim. And of course the voice system is nothing that would ever keep me away from playing, neither from recommending the sim to other people. I just feel like there's quite some room for improvement here. To make the best flight sim even better.
  23. Always interesting to learn something new, didn't know that! It seems that not all G-6 front screens had this, though. Since I never saw this device before, I recently took a look into Eric 'Winkle' Brown's book 'Fighters of the Luftwaffe' and both the external blue print of the G-6, as well as the internal from inside the cockpit show the front screen without the plate.
  24. Drama, baby! I am astonished by the incredible use of green wall technology at 1:48 and 3:14. It's almost like the attacking planes are really there!
  25. Most definitely! Afterall, every piece of content is worth buying. I for myself own every module and plane, even though I fly some of them only very rarely / almost never. Just to have the choice and to support the developers.
×
×
  • Create New...