Jump to content


Founders [standard]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

339 Excellent

About Avimimus

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

1155 profile views
  1. The new snow is pretty amazing too... and this is the opinion of a Canadian! Honestly, there are a lot of features in this update that should be given more attention (even if it means including them retroactively in a future dev update)!
  2. Given its lack of historical importance (compared to say, the StuG or the T-70) the Jagdtiger shouldn't be a priority for modelling... but what you're saying makes me wonder what they 128mm could do... the penetration tables end at 3km but the round could fly for 12km...
  3. Well... I can fly it well now. The low turn rate of the P-47 means that you need to be able to fly it pretty near to the edge of the envelope, and the improved stall behaviour and improved control surface weight gives me enough warning that I can actually get the most out of it without spinning it. I've also found that the lower roll rate improves my deflection shots and aiming (especially head on). I'm finding it easier to co-ordinate the controls somehow and that makes it a better gun platform. The lower roll also encourages a sense of serene premeditated flying... which is really the attitude one needs to take to win a fight in a P-47... so it works out psychologically as well. They fixed both P-47s... and the 150 Octane will help it in the '44-'45 scenarios.
  4. In case people were so excited about the new additions they missed these: One has to appreciate all the small bits of ongoing work to tech and to existing maps/campaigns. Can one manually set the size of the area of operations in the mission builder? I'm wondering if it'd be possible to cause aircraft to disengage earlier and more often (as was often historically the case - aircraft would lose sight of enemies - or would realise they were getting isolated from allies - and would retreat). AI are a bit too good at keeping track of the player location (no randomness there) and a bit too brave At least for typical pilots. So it'd be nice if there is a work-around or option to make the behaviour more historical.
  5. Yeah, I was ready to back during the original kickstarter... and then they extended the stretch goals... and extended them again... and... the feature creep and promises are what caused me to walk away. I did eventually pick it up with the intention of eventually flying a Reliant (is it a Fw-189 or a Gotha P.60?) on a sightseeing tour. However, there is no clarity on things like whether their insurance system will penalise people who play only intermittently (i.e. by being important and running down when you are offline). This is a problem as the insurance system could easily turn into a "freemium-style" pay-to-progress system. They could easily design it so one has to play many hours per week or constantly put real money into it to progress. They've also primarily been hunting whales by focusing on large multi-crew ships (pitched to people who are part of large orgs and committed for social reasons). They might pivot to solo or more casual (i.e. less than 4 hours per week) players after release... maybe... hence why I figure I might only get to use it as a sight-seeing game. There is also the issue that tech-requirements keep creeping up as a result of the game being in development for so long... oh, and they reset player progress every month because it is an alpha. I project them reaching their initial 'release goal' (where they claimed they'd allow player progress i.e. I could earn that sight-seeing reliant)... sometime in 2022-2024. They should have maybe 4 out of 9 promised game-loops and 3-4 star systems by then... assuming they can the underlying architecture in place to allow a game-space that large. The other thing I'll say - it might not be worth buying anything from them - but it is pretty interesting to watch the development from the side-lines. Plenty of room for getting popcorn and just seeing how it all plays out.
  6. It'd be rather nice if they had a 'historical convergence' option... so I didn't have to remember convergences and change them every time I switched aircraft. If they had an option for hard-coded convergences it might make it easier to have different convergences for each set of guns as well. No complex UI... just having pre-set angles for emitting bullets from the Mg-17, Mg-151 and Mg-FF (for example, with the FW-190A5 - where each type of gun had its own convergence). Nice to dream about anyway.
  7. Look: 1. VR is expensive and time-consuming to add to an old game engine. There is no way they will be able to properly add it before release. That is a fact. Filling every single thread with complaints about VR requiring months of work isn't going to cause it to happen. 2. The team has stated that it is a priority post-release to try to add VR. This will happen if the publisher approves continued development of the sim (and that obviously depends on sales). So, not sabotaging the release will increase your chances of getting VR. 3. You obviously don't have to purchase the sim. If you can't enjoy a flight-sim that doesn't have VR... if VR means that much to you... it wouldn't make sense to purchase the sim, after-all. If VR gets added, you might then buy it. 4. That said, I've flown flight sims for 25 years without VR... it is possible. Most users still aren't using VR and are capable of enjoying the sim. So, it might still be worthwhile... especially as this sim is going to be so unique. But no one is saying you have to support development by buying it. See point 1. again. P.S. I am not affiliated with the developer or publisher. I am getting tired of every thread having comments about VR... and every conversation being interrupted though! Especially as... well, see point 1. again.
  8. @meplanes1969 I created a mod some time ago which removed the 'fireball' explosions when soft-skinned vehicles are destroyed. I found that it made strafing feel more realistic and caused me to focus more on damaging columns, rather than completely burning individual ground vehicles. However, I haven't maintained this mod. I might rebuild it. However, I thought that - since it is such a simple mod - and since you are becoming the master of effects mods for Great Battles - that you might be interested in taking it over?
  9. Yes, I missed it - thanks for sharing! You guys should make sure the trailer ends up as part of one of the upcoming dev updates! Just to make sure we see it.
  10. There is actually a bit of logic to that... if you can only buy one sim a year then Desert Wings will give you a lot more content in 2020 and BoN will have more of its content completed by 2021 (since it is in early access)... So, it'd make sense to get both in that order. One could probably manage to get the pre-order price for both as well (as BoN likely won't be out of pre-order until at least a year from now) and the developers of both will still get paid.
  11. Well, 1946 was announced before the Peshka expansion became available in the West... so... I could see one being a diehard by rushing to pre-order it. I actually tried to get the U.K. collector's edition of Cliffs (getting a friend to order it) but it never arrived. But, if we're doing the whole 'I'm a die-hard fan because I've got two copies of the Ace Expansion Pack' kindof silly conversation... I'll give you what I think the prestige one is: Having rushed out to buy the copy of PC Gamer that had the original Il-2 demo (the first one - not the post-release v1.2 one)!
  12. But getting shorter every day. It means a release this month, or next month, at the latest. Also fun for recreating the Mechelen incident... just think, by failing to ask what your passenger is carrying and getting lost you can basically cause the Ardennes breakout and accelerate the fall of France by a month or more!
  13. Part of a reason why I asked this is because a lot of people don't have answers to these questions. Speaking of Churchill, when he spoke he had a habit of making every operation the critical turning point, the event upon which the entire course of the war might hinge. For all his faults he was good at that kind of overstatement. Unfortunately, the historical importance in North Africa, the struggles, the role in diverting resources from the eastern front... all of that tends to get ignored and forgotten. So much of what got me into flight-simulators was reading biographies and first person accounts (and meeting vets). But I doubt young people today have similar opportunities. With attention on other theatres (especially for Americans, where the Pacific, D-Day, and the Bulge are usually the only stories) I wonder how many people can actually get excited about fighting in Africa. So I'm interested in what people say for when I pitch the sim to friends.
  14. We are discussing 80 year old history... I think being a few weeks late to contribute something is hardly a problem 😄 Thanks for the informative post (and the research)! It is really interesting.
  • Create New...