Jump to content

MarderIV

Members
  • Content Count

    152
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

49 Excellent

About MarderIV

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

615 profile views
  1. This might need the dev's attention, if you have a mission file that may be of some good use. It might be a problem with mission triggers. How many times has this happened to you?
  2. I've seen this outside of BoBP as well, just a couple days ago flying Ishaks on escort oddly enough. Not 15 minutes later the wing called BINGO and RTB all of the sudden. Are your flight's fuel load okay or was it auto adjusted to 67%?
  3. Just do as most would probably do - get it "early" when at least a number of the planes are available already. Usually PWCG puts them on other maps before the official ones get released, not to mention other " Plane Y over X Map" mods and MP. I think I'm kind of like you on this, since money today is worth more than money tomorrow, but you're also missing the collector plane discount. And besides, it's so early into the cycle you could probably put some tranches in savings towards the inevitable trickle of content down the line. I didn't get BoBP until well over a couple planes came out, and I still got the Collector Planes in. It's a hell of a lot better deal than, *ahem*, it's other competitors. But don't let me sell it to you just on that, it's your money of course. Just laying out the value there is, and how this series fares a lot better in giving it than others.
  4. That Boulton Paul Defiant. I just . . . *snort*. Give it the Pe-2 gunner and I think it just might work.
  5. Folks really need to understand the distinction between "Good to have features" and "Critical must-develop features". Not egging on you or anything, absolutely not. But as cool as this sounds, there are still a lot of other areas that must be homed in on first.
  6. Delete everyone from the flight save yourself, customize your loadout including the skin, then re-add the squad. Only works if your the lead though. I usually start careers as lead and only assign myself as wingman if I want to be a wingman. Gives a lot of flexibility in that regard.
  7. This is likely one of my core arguments for this title. I can see the Devs going about it as more of an experiment, since every time I look at it a lot of what makes tank sims tenable seem to be missing. Apart from the inclusion of a string of single missions and it's utility in Multiplayer, there doesn't seem to be a lot going for it actually. When you look at titles like SABOW, Panzer Elite, and probably even Steel Beasts (though the latter still requires some input from the player to generate content streams), they all have something in common from a ground ops perspective: a fluid process for sustaining replayability. In the case of SABOW, generating content is about as simple as placing your intended OOB on a tile on the map and playing from there, with the AI taking over friendly and enemy ground units decision making in dynamic ways to make for replayable content. Obviously Tank Crew doesn't have that capability, so something else must be put in place. Tank Crew isn't like any of the current standing products Il-2 has at the moment. Key in point, we don't exactly operate out of airfields and whatever mission content that's to be generated ought to follow either a moving front-line, or do away with that concept and go to a highly extended QMB route which, if it's still stuck to certain areas, would end up feeling limited still. As far as mission generation go, I think something of the sort that's similar to Armored Brigade (a wargame) would probably be best. Even if it just comes as a mod. In that title, you can pretty much generate your own campaign by selecting consecutive map areas and having the engine generate consecutive missions based on user input that declares the OOB of friendly and enemy assets. That way, with a couple clicks, you get fully-formed content streams without having to go through the Il-2 mission editor and suffer DCS content syndrome. Just an idea. There's a lot of ideas out there the Devs can pull from IMO. I can't argue against facts, it's pretty obvious this was the case. But I feel like this could just end up being used as a crutch or an excuse to not pursue development work on extending gameplay elements. I get it's important for the Devs to create content in line with historical records, yes. We have the current run of missions for that. But what happens after is where my concern pretty much lies. @sevenless made a wonderful point about trying to emulate what Panzer Elite had done in that regard. I really don't want these titles to end up like DCS where would always have to put in time with editors instead of actually playing the tanks. The fact Il-2 Career modes can make content without hardly any input from me is one of the reasons why I've pretty much abandoned DCS. I don't know what everybody else is going through, but I sincerely doubt there's enough time floating around to tinker with editors for an hour and actually play for half. I get most folks will say just hop into MP. But for some, MP might end up being a gate they can't quite go through for their own reasons.
  8. I think I remember an interview with Jason where he specifically said sequels and further development on these projects (including Tank Crew) would be highly dependent on sales from those specific projects. IIRC not so much the whole portfolio itself, but these products exclusively. So we'll really just have to see where this goes.
  9. Doubtful. At least in my experience, even landing on fields other than officially designated airfields or aerodromes is problematic. I understand it could be done, but for the resources available I think the work that would be put into it wouldn't really tick a lot of checkmarks as far as benefits are concerned. There are a whole slew of potential value-adds this game could deploy, but for the most part stuff like this falls more into the developers' "Good to have" list than it's "Must have, Critical" list.
  10. Good grief that's long. I've been mostly skipping these missions since then I believe. Looks like I'll be skipping them moving forward.
  11. Must be a bug then. Was just wondering there for a bit because I remember this used to happen way back in the past. I think I've seen a bunch of post relating to this matter while I was searching back on the forums. Rather odd thing. Figured this might have been patched up by now if it was indeed a bug.
  12. Just curious about certain things with this type of mission - specifically with regards to how enemy planes seem to have a habit of spawning at the exact time you complete the mission itself and are tasked with RTB. All while being unopposed while you're on station itself, i.e. Transit to AO > Loop on Station for N minutes > Receive RTB Order > Enemy A/C spawns and are tasked with engaging your AO. It's been bugging me for years now. Is this a bug (pardon the pun)? Or is there something I'm missing with regards to the logic of these kinds of missions. It appears that the whole "Spawn Enemy Strike Group On Player RTB" thing has been occurring ever since, and with significant frequency. Just need help on understanding this or why it's happening. Rather jarring to CTRL+F2 while on station and see no enemies on the air, only for them to appear the second you "Complete" your mission. Wonder what's going on.
  13. You're absolutely right in terms of how the optics should be. But at the same time @Mitthrawnuruodo also raises great points about hardware and personal/physical limitations. I want to try and understand your position on this. Would you rather have folks get an option for full simulation while keeping assists like zoom available for other people or would you rather have the Devs strictly enforce a one-experience-only approach, e.g. no zoom at all? Pardon, because I'm getting a lot of gate-keeping vibes from this. Personally I'd love to play under full-real conditions, but not at other folks expense. Just trying to get a handle on what you're trying to say.
  14. As an option hopefully. For some folks who need assistance at least. I shudder to think the devs would want to lock people out of assistance for the sake of realism over gameplay.
  15. That seems like a lot of Loading menus to go through. Wouldn't it be better to hack in teleportation instead? In the very least I know some payware aircraft from other titles that could do this, but it'll be highly dependent on what the engine would allow them to do (in the case of that other title I mentioned, it was by default). It just seems like this way would generate a lot of overhead; having to load and keep track of multiple instances. Attempting to teleport priority assets around might be more appropriate, even if simply having it a function of distance. In any case, I've seen a lot of really good ideas on the forum over the years, and I'm sure with the devs being more intimate with the product that they'd have even better ones. But this feature seems like something that could have been done prior. Seems like a lot of stuff tying the devs hands back, and I think this kind of feature would simply just get dropped during triage. Hell, I think it might have been dropped multiple times over Il-2's life.
×
×
  • Create New...