Jump to content

Eisenfaustus

Members
  • Content Count

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

11 Good

About Eisenfaustus

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

111 profile views
  1. Eisenfaustus

    Specialist squadrons in career mode

    In Moscow and Stalingrad career the Schlachtgruppen utilize BF109Es as ground attacker instead of fighter (which is historicly correct of course) That'd fill your definition of specialized aircraft.
  2. Eisenfaustus

    Anti tank devices?

    Hi everyone, does anyone know wether there will be other (AI controlled) Anti tank forces included in the final product? Tankbusting planes will obviously be there. But what about anti tank guns? Infantry with anti tank weapons? Mines? Tanker were usually as afraid of those as they were from hostile tanks.
  3. Eisenfaustus

    Please fix the NASCAR AI.

    It was just an estimate because I have seen decent airial combat AI while I never found any good tank AI. And that exactly because of the point you stated - using the terrain to your advantage and making corresponding tactical calls seems to me harder than similar tactical decisions in the air. But having served in the infantry I'm obviously biased and can be completely wrong ^^ However I would love if (big IF here) the PL AI turns great we get a flightleader AI as well - having the AI using airial group tactics instead of each plane fighting on it's own and cooperation being purely incidental would add a great deal of immersion to SP and COOP gameplay, I believe...
  4. Eisenfaustus

    Please fix the NASCAR AI.

    But they are doing tank commanders and platoon leader ai right now - aren't they? So they DO have some kind of AI guy onboard. And if he is to tackle armored combat AI (which in my book seems harder to do properly than airial combat) then he hopefully knows his Job. So I keep my hopes up, that after tank combat is done (and I also hope they take the time to do tank AI as good as possible!), maybe he could give the airial ai the overhaul it needs! But noone can see the future ^^
  5. Eisenfaustus

    Alternative for Pacific Theatre after Bodenplatte

    I'm absolutely open to suggestions concerning this poll - Korea? I'll gladly add a sixth option - but someone with more knowledge than me should propose a 8+2 planeset. Sicily or Malta both seem to me like CLOD's turf - but sure why not? Although what planesets are thinking of? And if you believe my proposed planesets don't make sense feel free to propose changes - I know on these forums there most likely are many with a deeper knowledge of military aviation than me ^^ And don't get me wrong - I'd love a PTO scenario as the next guy, but there seem to be huge problems in realisation. That's why I'm interested in what alternatives the community is interested in the most.
  6. Eisenfaustus

    Alternative for Pacific Theatre after Bodenplatte

    Hm - but if I understand correctly especially the Japanese side is difficult for the devs because japanese planes of WWII seem not to be as well dokumented as those of the other major powers. That seems to be why we get Bodenplatte before Midway. So any further alternative to Midway would have to exclude Japanese planes - otherwise we we could get actually battle of midway... But I share your view, that early china would fit the current SP outfit better than a Midway scenario.
  7. Eisenfaustus

    Alternative for Pacific Theatre after Bodenplatte

    Meaning what? Which region, timeframe and planeset could you imagine?
  8. Hi there! I just asked myself how radio communication in WWII for aircraft and tanks on a tactical level was organized. I read that Japanese for most of the war had such bad radio equipment they prefered to use hand signals for communications (hence close vic formation) But all other major powers (soviets at least in the second half of the war) I believe had one radio per aircraft/tank. So my question is who talked to whoem and had leaders in any armed forces two radios on their platform? I could imagine that in USAAF and RAF, that used squadrons as largest tactical formation, it could be possible to coordinate an airial engagement with all squadron members on the same frequency (althogh this means thy'd not talk to the bombers they were escorting). But the Luftwaffe used its Gruppen as tactical formations - and forty men on the same frequency seems like chaos - but if every Staffel had its own frequency how could the Gruppenkommandeur lead his Staffeln in the air? And I have no idea how the VVS employed its regiments at all? Same for tanks of all major powers - here even a whole company on the same frequency can lead to chaos, nevertheless a batallion.... Do you have any infos on how the diffrent powers organised their radio frequencies?
  9. Hi everyone, The idea of this question is not, what you'd prefer to a pacific theme. If pacific can be done, then it should be done as was announced. But since there seem to be considerable problems researching Japanese aircraft and the scenario seems not to fit current il2 layout in many ways (few decisive engagements instead of long term small tactical missions) there is a good chance even after Bodenplatte Battle of Midway cannot happen. If that should be the case I'm curious what other scenario you all would be interested in most? Excluding Battle of Britain, Africa and MTO as CLOD's turf I can think mainly of 4 scenarios: The Battle of Spain + Would set THE start for Luftwaffe VVS antagony + Seldom represented scenario + Would be a "bridge" between WWI and WWII avation The Battle of Talvisota + Continuity for VVS Carreers + Finish air force seldom represented + Therefore quite "exotic" planes The Battle of France + French Air Force and her valiant struggle are much underrepresented in media (They gave the Luftwaffe quite a challenge) + Already well researched area for the map (Flying circus, Bodenplatte) - only six weeks (unless phoney war included in carreer) - might still interfere with CLOD sphere The Battle of Berlin +Logic End for VVS and Luftwaffe Carreers +Cool late war stuff +would fit together with Bodenplatte planeset -historical plausability: Luftwaffe didn't really fight back at that point any more Or do you have any air war scenarios in mind fitting the series design, not colliding with CLOD I missed?
  10. Eisenfaustus

    A.I. DEFENSIVE MANOUVERING..ANY LIGHT IN FUTURE?

    But this could be a good thing in the long run! I imagine that a decent ground combat AI is even harder than an airial combat ai. Especially a commander AI and platoon leader AI. I have actually my doubts they'll get that right - that's why haven't bough TC yet. But should these AI's work well at some point they obviously have an AI expert on the team who could also improve flight ai substancially at some point I believe that flight behaviour is not the only thing lacking in AI to make it a truely immersive experience. I'll now display bad manners in quoting myself from another threat in the polls section: 1st Situational (un)awareness: You cannot sneak up on AI - they know you are there. Always. Most kills in WWII airial combat were achieved in suprise bounces - not in this game... 2nd Maneuvering: They already started improving this (hooray!) but most of the time the AI still dives for the deck and then does an infinite high speed turn in the same direction... From what I read the most common defensive tactic (Until they developed something special for a certain adversary) in most air forces of WWII was a sharp break turn to have the enemy overshoot and start scissoring to press for gun solution... The higher the skill level of the ai the more sophisticated maneuvers should be of course... Also of course this includes a wish for more effective ground attacks. 3rd Decision making: When to attack when to flee? How to flee (climbing, diving, cloud cover) How to attack (maneuvering into a favourable position before you engage); all based on mission, status, type and numbers of own and hostile aircraft, weather, ammo and of course AI skill level (with rookies making the wrong call more often!) - Current AI fights you to the death no matter what (or sometimes ignores you) 4th Pilot Error: Current AI always has perfect control of the aircraft - depending on AI skill there should be pilot errors - from not managing the engine perfectly, maneuvering at perfect angles to stalling in the heat of battle (panic after near misses) or losing control when control surfaces are damaged. 5th Tactics: While of course No. 2 and 3 already include some tactical improvements here I'm talking about formations and SOPs (especially interesting for Bodenplatte as RAF, USAAF and Lw used the finger four [which is something diffrent from the games 4 ship Vic] as standard, fought in pairs and used crossover turns - none of which is possible with current AI) This of course would also neccessitate better communications - including the possibility to either issue diffrent orders to the A/C of your flight (like one pair attack, one pair flying cover) or even recieving tasks from an AI flight leader! I put these in the right order of importance for me personally. So while I do see maneuvering as very important to improve the ai - in my eyes it's just one of several weaknesses in the way of immersion
  11. Eisenfaustus

    A.I. DEFENSIVE MANOUVERING..ANY LIGHT IN FUTURE?

    Yeah - that's not what he said nor is it very plausible. I for example am more into history than aviation. So I love games that immerse me into reacreated history. Multiplayer doesn't. People on multiplayer server people looking for a fun expierence not soldiers risking their lives carrying out a mission. And such they behave - cool for people who want to compete to be the best, bad for someone looking for immersion. On the other hand I have little kids in my household - so I prefer to be able to pause any game any moment - in MP I'd letting my team down when I quit to care for my offspring. I used to play a lot online (warthunder for example) and understand the thrill of wanting to be the best. But that's not what I bought IL2 for. My preferences changed - now I wish for immersive historical gameplay. Like IL2 GB Career mode but with believable immersive AI (friend AND foe) You are suggesting that people spent 60-320 bucks and then are afraid to try their favorite game mode MP because they aren't good enough? I don't believe that - I dare say the majority of single players out there share my wish for an immersive expierence rather than being afraid of MP.
  12. For me the AI is the main reason why I'm still playing other sims most of the time - because everything else this sim does so great! Therefore I'd rather wait a while longer for Bodenplatte than to have all the cool stuff of BP without an immersive AI to enjoy it to it's full potential... Since they already started improving AI in the last patches I'm getting my hopes up However I believe there unfortunatly still is very much to be done to make the AI truely immersive: 1st Situational (un)awareness: You cannot sneak up on AI - they know you are there. Always. Most kills in WWII airial combat were achieved in suprise bounces - not in this game... 2nd Maneuvering: They already started improving this (hooray!) but most of the time the AI still dives for the deck and then does an infinite high speed turn in the same direction... From what I read the most common defensive tactic (Until they developed something special for a certain adversary) in most air forces of WWII was a sharp break turn to have the enemy overshoot and start scissoring to press for gun solution... The higher the skill level of the ai the more sophisticated maneuvers should be of course... Also of course this includes a wish for more effective ground attacks. 3rd Decision making: When to attack when to flee? How to flee (climbing, diving, cloud cover) How to attack (maneuvering into a favourable position before you engage); all based on mission, status, type and numbers of own and hostile aircraft, weather, ammo and of course AI skill level (with rookies making the wrong call more often!) - Current AI fights you to the death no matter what (or sometimes ignores you) 4th Pilot Error: Current AI always has perfect control of the aircraft - depending on AI skill there should be pilot errors - from not managing the engine perfectly, maneuvering at perfect angles to stalling in the heat of battle (panic after near misses) or losing control when control surfaces are damaged. 5th Tactics: While of course No. 2 and 3 already include some tactical improvements here I'm talking about formations and SOPs (especially interesting for Bodenplatte as RAF, USAAF and Lw used the finger four [which is something diffrent from the games 4 ship Vic] as standard, fought in pairs and used crossover turns - none of which is possible with current AI) This of course would also neccessitate better communications - including the possibility to either issue diffrent orders to the A/C of your flight (like one pair attack, one pair flying cover) or even recieving tasks from an AI flight leader! I put these in the right order of importance for me personally. If all of this was realized the immersion of this game would more than double in my book... One must be allowed to dream ^^
  13. Love to read about further AI fixes - hope you keep up improving on that front!
  14. Did it work properly? Started to look for Desastersoft campaigns on ebay ect...
  15. You are right - the HE Filler is only unprportionate large but not "most of the projectile". I changed my post accordingly. Thanks That would be a poor compensation - the idea of mines from what I read was less to use the airframe as fragmentation source to hit some vital part and more to destroy the airframe itself by the shockwave. A Blenheim IV fuselage after a single hit by a 30mm Mine Under stress in the air the tailsection would propably rip off... The Wing of the Blenheim: Even if the wing would not rip off under stress - I dare say the aircraft would be out of control... Obviously even more destructive on a fighter sized target: A Minengeschoss does have disadvantages though: It won't penetrate any kind of armor and produces less Fragmentation on it's own So it's a round specialized for light armored air targets and far less efficient for strafing or heavily armored air targets like B17 and Sturmoviks - both much harder targets than a Blenheim... That's why the British decided against copying the design in 1940 and the Germans always mixed the round with other ammo types (for the Mk108 according to "Horrido! Des Jägers Schießfibel" 1 Mine and 1 Incendiary round)
×