110 in BoS?

[FuriousMeow]

Yes, because all stated so far has been regarding the pre-release bundles only.

 

There has been no discussion regarding release packages or purchases.

 

Remember, the Il-2 rear cockpit mod is unlockable - but if you pre-order prior to Sept 1st you don't have to unlock it.

Edited August 14, 2013 by FuriousMeow

[Matt]

Just what I'm thinking, because remember pre-orders get bonuses for supporting early.

I'm pretty sure it would be in the developers favor to say that though. I see no reason why they should do that. They would get more preorders and less complains than if they would tell this afterwards ("btw, since you didn't preorder, you now have to buy those planes", I can't see that having a positive impact).

[III/JG53Frankyboy]

i expect a Bf110F in a later Kuban 43 AdOn. ZG1 was there and for that scenario 777 build the german singlesetfighters already with BoS

[BeastyBaiter]

I hope a Bf-110 model is one of the very first planes added after the initial release. In fact I'm a little shocked that the 190A3 was chosen in its place. The 190A is one of my favorite planes so I'm certainly not complaining about that, but it is a surprise none the less. I'd also put the P-40E, IAR.80 and MC.202 high on the list too. All participated in significant numbers around Stalingrad. They would also help round out the eastern front in general for the 1942 period. The addition of the 202 and P-40E would have the added benifit of being recyclable for Meditarranian addons.

[TJT]

200, not 202.

[Lusekofte]

I wish people focus more on what is going to be released  than a hypothetic add on later on. I am pretty sure that if the developers not gettin enough money in , there will be no addon. That is why we in the community should support this Sim , and that means preorder. Also we should involve in the discussion on how to make it good.

One of them is getting the 110 added to it. ASAP.

I know we have to acknowledge the time limit and quality before quantity, but we can help with priorety   

[76SQN-J0NJ0N]

110 will be sweet, looking forward to it already.

[LG1.Klein]

If I recall correctly it was present in very small numbers on the Eastern front, only one ZG were equipped with them.

 

Incorrect sir. As matter of fact the Gruppe that my unit represents is the only Gruppe to serve outside of the eastern front. I./ZG26, II./ZG26, and IV./ZG26 all operated on the eastern front. 9./ZG26 which is the 9th Staffel of the 3rd Gruppe or III./ZG26 was the only Gruppe to operate in the Mediterranean. Therefore indicating that 75% or better of all of ZG26 was present on the eastern front. Small numbers would be far from what I call the 110 presence in Russia. Also as I said Russia was the 110s second lease on life before becoming Nachtjagdgeschwader or resedignated into FW190 and ME262 units.

 

As someone previously mentioned, I am certain the 110 far exceeded the numbers of the FW190. Of which I would gladly trade for a 110.

 

Someone else mentioned the 110 being an addon after the Macchi and IAR aircraft. I plead to the developers that certainly this will not be so.

 

It is my strong opinion that not having the 110 available at launch would indicate a waste of 89.99 USD for this game to be pre ordered.

Edited August 15, 2013 by 9./ZG26Klein

[MineFewer]

yes pls give us 110 and a p-40 to shoot it down with.

[Dutch]

closely followed by the Ju 52.

 

Can someone please explain the obsession this forum has with the Ju52? What do you expect to do with it in a combat flight sim? Admittedly, if you're talking about AI, that's one thing. But are you blokes seriously talking about a flyable Ju52?

What for? Are you looking forward to long slow flights in order to dump a load of groceries to the wrong army?

 

Don't see what the fascination is. But I apologise, the thread was about the 110. Sorry Uther.

[GP*]

Can someone please explain the obsession this forum has with the Ju52? What do you expect to do with it in a combat flight sim? Admittedly, if you're talking about AI, that's one thing. But are you blokes seriously talking about a flyable Ju52?

What for? Are you looking forward to long slow flights in order to dump a load of groceries to the wrong army?

 

Don't see what the fascination is. But I apologise, the thread was about the 110. Sorry Uther.

 

Although it's a bit harsh, I agree with the sentiments of the above post. People tend to obsess about and demand a plane that they will most likely only fly a handful of times. I mean, there will undoubtedly be those few people who really get their jollies flying something like the Ju52 around alllllll the time (might as well be playing MSFS or something non-tactical if that's the case), but I imagine the flow going something like this:

 

Person 1: "I'd really, really love (insert either a) obscure plane or b) an aircraft that was historically important but will have minimal impact on a COMBAT flight sim except for the few diehards who love it)

 

Person 2: "Oh my goodness, we just HAVE to have that plane!"

 

Person 3: "Concur. BOS is incomplete without it and will be a failure if it's not included!"

 

(Devs fold and model the aircraft)

 

Persons 1, 2, and 3: "Oh, this is really neat." (then resume flying their Bf-109 5 minutes later)

 

(note: the above is meant for comic relief more than anything else. Please keep your respective panties out of a bunch )

[LukeFF]

It's the dilemma of modeling aircraft that are important for the theater but don't necessarily make for the greatest flying experience for the player. I'm sure the developers will find a good solution for all. 

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 I wish to see Bf110 in BoS one day. If not in Stalingrad, then maybe in another theatre? I have the book of a Bf110 pilot who flew Jabo missions in Eastern front and it was a tough job. But still it seems the 110 held it's own So why not if time and/or resources permit. Before that will be perfectly happy with my Bf109F-4 and G-2

[Finkeren]

Can someone please explain the obsession this forum has with the Ju52? What do you expect to do with it in a combat flight sim? Admittedly, if you're talking about AI, that's one thing. But are you blokes seriously talking about a flyable Ju52?

What for? Are you looking forward to long slow flights in order to dump a load of groceries to the wrong army?

 

Don't see what the fascination is. But I apologise, the thread was about the 110. Sorry Uther.

OFF TOPIC:

While I'm one of those persons, who would gleefully jump in the cockpit and fly a Ju-52 career, just trying to stay alive during the "Stalingrad Airlift", I understand, that I'm propably in a minority here.

 

There are two main reasons why I believe we need the Ju-52 at some point for BoS to be complete:

 

1. As an AI target in offline campaign. Running in to nothing but He-111s during the airlift will get old, fast.

 

2. (And this is more important) We need it for online combat scenarios. I don't know if you've ever played RoF online, but many servers employ a type of mission system, where you have to scout certain ground targets, swipe away air defences and destroy the targets in that order to gain the advantage. Missions where the Axis side has to fly supplies into the Stalingrad pocket will be an essential part of the online war, and there the He-111 is just not a substitute for the Ju-52.

 

:END OFF TOPIC

[Lusekofte]

Can someone please explain the obsession this forum has with the Ju52? What do you expect to do with it in a combat flight sim? Admittedly, if you're talking about AI, that's one thing. But are you blokes seriously talking about a flyable Ju52?

What for? Are you looking forward to long slow flights in order to dump a load of groceries to the wrong army?

 

Don't see what the fascination is. But I apologise, the thread was about the 110. Sorry Uther.

Wrong, I have flown simulators from 1996 , in IL 2 I made my own campaign  for transports. I find it very exiting to be able to survive in a underdog. But ofcourse in an online server the gain has to be big if you ever see a onliner flying it

[Uufflakke]

Can someone please explain the obsession this forum has with the Ju52? What do you expect to do with it in a combat flight sim? Admittedly, if you're talking about AI, that's one thing. But are you blokes seriously talking about a flyable Ju52?

What for? Are you looking forward to long slow flights in order to dump a load of groceries to the wrong army?

 

Don't see what the fascination is. But I apologise, the thread was about the 110. Sorry Uther.

 

Very simple to explain.

A flightsim historically based on the Battle of Stalingrad without the Ju-52 is the same thing as a WWII combat game historically based on D-Day without Higgins boats or transport ships.

Rather silly.

 

And as every AI plane in BoS is flyable (the Dev team don't want to include only AI planes) the Ju-52 needs to be flyable also.

 

There will also be a lot of enthusiast who really would like to fly the Ju-52 from A to B to deliver the cargo.

 

A compromise would be to include the Ju-52 as a static aircraft.

 

 

But back on topic.

The Bf-110 would be a great plane to fly with.

[III/JG53Frankyboy]

Incorrect sir. As matter of fact the Gruppe that my unit represents is the only Gruppe to serve outside of the eastern front. I./ZG26, II./ZG26, and IV./ZG26 all operated on the eastern front. 9./ZG26 which is the 9th Staffel of the 3rd Gruppe or III./ZG26 was the only Gruppe to operate in the Mediterranean. Therefore indicating that 75% or better of all of ZG26 was present on the eastern front. Small numbers would be far from what I call the 110 presence in Russia. Also as I said Russia was the 110s second lease on life before becoming Nachtjagdgeschwader or resedignated into FW190 and ME262 units. As someone previously mentioned, I am certain the 110 far exceeded the numbers of the FW190. Of which I would gladly trade for a 110. Someone else mentioned the 110 being an addon after the Macchi and IAR aircraft. I plead to the developers that certainly this will not be so. It is my strong opinion that not having the 110 available at launch would indicate a waste of 89.99 USD for this game to be pre ordered.

that heavily depends on the timeframe.......end of 1942 the 110 force was relativ low at the easternfront, only 2 Gruops of ZG1 and one squadron of JG 5 , and sure the recon units IIRC

Edited August 15, 2013 by Frankyboy

[leitmotiv]

Can someone please explain the obsession this forum has with the Ju52? What do you expect to do with it in a combat flight sim? Admittedly, if you're talking about AI, that's one thing. But are you blokes seriously talking about a flyable Ju52?

What for? Are you looking forward to long slow flights in order to dump a load of groceries to the wrong army?

 

...

 

In online wars you see importance of transport airplanes

 

You need them to resuply just captured airfield, or airfield on witch enemy bombers almost destroy supplys so your and other squadrons can take of from it with bombers and fighters, or sending supplys to your ground units because comander cant move them because they spend all fuel, or when your droping trops or spys behined enemy lines to get tactical advantage or suprise the enemy. And it was always important to have human pilot in them, he could change in flight from plane A to backup plan B if recon pilot saw enemys over target A, AI could not be redirected during the missions.

 

But if you only play on DF servers i understand this lack of interest for this type of airplanes

 

Back to Bf-110, imagine what would happend if they made it insted of Fw-190, and say you can buy Bf-110 for Luftwaffe and at same time La5 for VVS (or get them in pre-order), people would cry about this VVS has 3 fighters Luftwaffe only 2 109s  not their falt Russians had more types of fighters in Stalingrad battles. 

It will be interesting to see how will they handle this on next pair of airplanes adding VVS fighters over Stalingrad I-16, Yak-7, Yak-9, P-40, and what to add on Luftwaffe fighters (Bf-109E7, IAR80 and MC200  ), or again one that didnt fight over area of battle at that time? just because devs “this plane could be there, it was capable to fight in these circumstances and combat situation, thus the FW-190 is by all means a machine of that period” lol with that logic they could add Spit V, early Spit-9, P-39s or early P-51s they were also airplanes of that time and could fight over Stalingrad at that time, if they were send to russia to that front. 

They cant give as aditional airplane one side a fighter and on other side a bomber, or just fighter-bomber, more people would cry about that then few of us crying about lack of 110, Po-2 or Ju-52

 

see how they are watching to have equal type (3xfighter, 1xbomber 1xground attack) of airplanes per side

 

Frankyboy where did you get the data that JG5 fight on east front at the time of BoS, they all were in Norway to my knowledge at this time of Stalingrad battles

[SYN_Ricky]

Frankyboy where did you get the data that JG5 fight on east front at the time of BoS, they all were in Norway to my knowledge at this time of Stalingrad battles

 

 

II/JG5 and III/JG5 were stationed in the Petsamo area fighting againt the russians flying Bf-109s while I and IV/JG5 were stationed in Norway. In february 1943 14(Jabo)/JG 5 was formed in Petsamo flying FW-190s.

Edited August 15, 2013 by SYN_Ricky

[leitmotiv]

II/JG5 and III/JG5 were stationed in the Petsamo area fighting againt the russians flying Bf-109s while I and IV/JG5 were stationed in Norway. In february 1943 14(Jabo)/JG 5 was formed in Petsamo flying FW-190s.

 

Thanks Ricky didnt know that

[III/JG53Frankyboy]

In online wars you see importance of transport airplanes

 

You need them to resuply just captured airfield, or airfield on witch enemy bombers almost destroy supplys so your and other squadrons can take of from it with bombers and fighters, or sending supplys to your ground units because comander cant move them because they spend all fuel, or when your droping trops or spys behined enemy lines to get tactical advantage or suprise the enemy. And it was always important to have human pilot in them, he could change in flight from plane A to backup plan B if recon pilot saw enemys over target A, AI could not be redirected during the missions.

 

But if you only play on DF servers i understand this lack of interest for this type of airplanes

 

Back to Bf-110, imagine what would happend if they made it insted of Fw-190, and say you can buy Bf-110 for Luftwaffe and at same time La5 for VVS (or get them in pre-order), people would cry about this VVS has 3 fighters Luftwaffe only 2 109s not their falt Russians had more types of fighters in Stalingrad battles.

It will be interesting to see how will they handle this on next pair of airplanes adding VVS fighters over Stalingrad I-16, Yak-7, Yak-9, P-40, and what to add on Luftwaffe fighters (Bf-109E7, IAR80 and MC200 ), or again one that didnt fight over area of battle at that time? just because devs “this plane could be there, it was capable to fight in these circumstances and combat situation, thus the FW-190 is by all means a machine of that period” lol with that logic they could add Spit V, early Spit-9, P-39s or early P-51s they were also airplanes of that time and could fight over Stalingrad at that time, if they were send to russia to that front.

They cant give as aditional airplane one side a fighter and on other side a bomber, or just fighter-bomber, more people would cry about that then few of us crying about lack of 110, Po-2 or Ju-52

 

see how they are watching to have equal type (3xfighter, 1xbomber 1xground attack) of airplanes per side

 

Frankyboy where did you get the data that JG5 fight on east front at the time of BoS, they all were in Norway to my knowledge at this time of Stalingrad battles

1. i would have coupled the 109G-2 together with the La5

2. i ment at all easterfront areas, not only Stalingrad area. Just the time when the ysoviets started their offensive at Stalingrad.

13.(Z)/JG5 in Kirkenes http://www.ww2.dk/air/jagd/jg5.htm

Edited August 15, 2013 by Frankyboy

[leitmotiv]

ok thanks for clearing this out for me, i misunderstood you

 

 

Yes 109G2 and La5 would be better pair, but then you have problems with this funny unlock option, one would have to fly 109F to unlock Bf-110  

again problems, the way they have it now its just the easiest way possible fit their concept with smallest amount of complaining players

and Fw is there because loot of players liked it, they just had to figure how to fit it in

[Lusekofte]

Very simple to explain.

A flightsim historically based on the Battle of Stalingrad without the Ju-52 is the same thing as a WWII combat game historically based on D-Day without Higgins boats or transport ships.

Rather silly.

 

And as every AI plane in BoS is flyable (the Dev team don't want to include only AI planes) the Ju-52 needs to be flyable also.

 

There will also be a lot of enthusiast who really would like to fly the Ju-52 from A to B to deliver the cargo.

 

A compromise would be to include the Ju-52 as a static aircraft.

 

 

But back on topic.

The Bf-110 would be a great plane to fly with.

I wish some day flightsim online campaigns would take recourses into the game. Like you only have so much spare parts or fuel so you need to bring in more if this airbase shall be operative. I will gladly take upon me the task to fly freight planes to do such a task. And I bet those freighters would be priority targets of the enemy.

If such a scenario would take place the sim would have even more challanges since, the commanders not only have to pick a target, they have to think of logistic´s as well .

But of course that means that all sides need a transport AC

Edited August 15, 2013 by 9./ZG26Jaeger

[III/JG53Frankyboy]

there were online wars in IL2 with supply missions.......

[leitmotiv]

I wish some day flightsim online campaigns would take recourses into the game. Like you only have so much spare parts or fuel so you need to bring in more if this airbase shall be operative. I will gladly take upon me the task to fly freight planes to do such a task. And I bet those freighters would be priority targets of the enemy.

If such a scenario would take place the sim would have even more challanges since, the commanders not only have to pick a target, they have to think of logistic´s as well .

But of course that means that all sides need a transport AC

 

in IL2 ADW or SEOW online campaign wars you have this implemented, logistic is a key part of wars and its simulated very good in those OW, keeping factorys, airfield supplys alive or bombing enemy factories or transport supply trucks or ships, or hunting for or just flying transport airplanes is important when you have this simulated, and you have it in il2 for 4-5 years now in thouse online wars, thats why they are popular with most squadrons, gives importance to bombers transport or recon missions not just fighters

Edited August 15, 2013 by Yaklover

[III/JG53Frankyboy]

but then you have problems with this funny unlock option, one would have to fly 109F to unlock Bf-110  again problems,

perfect, Bf109F '+1 = ' Bf110F :D

to be serious, i no fan of their unlock idea anyway......but thats an other topic.

[FuriousMeow]

I wish some day flightsim online campaigns would take recourses into the game. Like you only have so much spare parts or fuel so you need to bring in more if this airbase shall be operative. I will gladly take upon me the task to fly freight planes to do such a task. And I bet those freighters would be priority targets of the enemy.

If such a scenario would take place the sim would have even more challanges since, the commanders not only have to pick a target, they have to think of logistic´s as well .

But of course that means that all sides need a transport AC

 

 

Online wars usually do that, as Yaklover said, but with manual intervention and human work. It'd be nice if the software had outputs and each factory/bridge/airfield/etc had a unique identifier with %s of damage. That way an external program could be developed that could handle all this automatically and update it an online war map and database.

 

Customizable online wars and what not, we know what we want in them - developers only sort of know, that's why campaigns are usually a little lacking because they only have so much time/resources/knowledge of every little facet that simply providing the software the proper external outputs and unique identifiers to allow us to create our own war would be best. It would also be neat, but probably much more far fetched and difficult, to allow inputs into a mission design. That way each side's commander has access to an online map to prep waypoints and flights for the next round of missions that would be put together and placed into a mission file that automatically loads in the server at the next mission start.

 

But developing those for just the online side would take away efforts from the single player campaigns (possibly) and that would cause quite the uproar (online vs offline - offliners always feel neglected).

 

Just rambling here anyway.

Edited August 15, 2013 by FuriousMeow

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Have you guys ever watched the interview of the guy who made the dynamic campaign to Falcon 4.0? The only one that still is truly dynamic. He could make it work on less than 5% CPU time on the computers at that time and today they can not make one running on the monsters we have? Imagine that as an online campaign :D

[FuriousMeow]

It's not about CPU power, it's about time and resources of the programmer(s).

[leitmotiv]

Online wars usually do that, as Yaklover said, but with manual intervention and human work. It'd be nice if the software had outputs and each factory/bridge/airfield/etc had a unique identifier with %s of damage. That way an external program could be developed that could handle all this automatically and update it an online war map and database.

 

Customizable online wars and what not, we know what we want in them - developers only sort of know, that's why campaigns are usually a little lacking because they only have so much time/resources/knowledge of every little facet that simply providing the software the proper external outputs and unique identifiers to allow us to create our own war would be best. It would also be neat, but probably much more far fetched and difficult, to allow inputs into a mission design. That way each side's commander has access to an online map to prep waypoints and flights for the next round of missions that would be put together and placed into a mission file that automatically loads in the server at the next mission start.

 

But developing those for just the online side would take away efforts from the single player campaigns (possibly) and that would cause quite the uproar (online vs offline - offliners always feel neglected).

 

Just rambling here anyway.

 

In ADW and SEOW external programs tracks damage done to factorys and deduces it automaticly for next mission.

 

And in SEOW each side comanders plans his tasks (ground unit movment, air sea and so on) on MissionPlaner not knowing what other side is doing exep from info you have from recon

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And in mision time war admin just combines two miss files and starts mission with all being planed in separat programs

Edited August 15, 2013 by Yaklover

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Or do they lack the skill to really create tight code anymore? Know a guy who has been programming over 30 years and he said that today programmers make more bloated code than they did when CPU cycles were a deciding factor among other things. Costs..oh those costs Sure it took a while and resources for the guy making Falcon 4.0 campaign, but it can be done. Anyways..110 to BoS

[FuriousMeow]

Sure it can be done, but did the Falcon 4 guy have to worry about doing historical research? Imagine the cries if a certain squadron shows up in the wrong sector with a skin from later in the war.

 

There's a lot more than just coding that would go into a dynamic campaign for WWI or WWII and not a fictional campaign such as Falcon's.

Edited August 15, 2013 by FuriousMeow

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 I have no knowledge of coding, but I would assume the guy made the engine handling the assets thus creating the campaign. So sure this would apply to a WW1/2 sim as well? A team creates the campaign engine while others do the other stuff. In Falcon 4.0 most of the squadrons etc. are not fictional. But I see your point.

[Rodolphe]

...

 

Extract from : Stalingrad The Air Battle : 1942 through January 1943,  Christer Bergtröm

 

Appendix 1 : Luftflotte IV Order of Battle, 20th Nov 1942.

 

• 3.(H)/11       Bf 110 : Nr available  07   /   07   Bf 110 Nr Serviceable 
• 7.(H)/LG2                                       07   /   04
• 3.(H)/31                                         05   /   01
• Stab/ZG 1                                      02   /   02
• I./ZG 1                                           32   /   18
• II./ZG 1                                          23   /   13
•  
• Stab/St.G. 77   Ju 87 & Bf 110     11   /    04

...

 

[III/JG53Frankyboy]

Sure it can be done, but did the Falcon 4 guy have to worry about doing historical research? Imagine the cries if a certain squadron shows up in the wrong sector with a skin from later in the war. There's a lot more than just coding that would go into a dynamic campaign for WWI or WWII and not a fictional campaign such as Falcon's.

a dynamic online war is not historical 100% , because , as example, a Stalingrad map can be won by the gernan side......

That is ok IMO. The VOW was different, there you couldnt fight to win a map/campaign. It tried to recreate history. But, it was not dynamice. You can have only one thing :D

Edited August 15, 2013 by Frankyboy

[FuriousMeow]

That post was concerning an offline campaign comparable to Falcon 4's offline campaign. Nothing to do with online.

[III/JG53Frankyboy]

ups, sorry

[theOden]

Sure it can be done, but did the Falcon 4 guy have to worry about doing historical research? Imagine the cries if a certain squadron shows up in the wrong sector with a skin from later in the war.

 

There's a lot more than just coding that would go into a dynamic campaign for WWI or WWII and not a fictional campaign such as Falcon's.

 

I think all kinds of dynamic campaigns can, at best, have a historical starting point/setup and from there on it's all about altering/keeping the historical flow by the player (depending on side).

Hopefully we will see a new "falcon campaign" in a simgame in the future but I won't hold my breath.

[707shap_Srbin]

http://forum.il2sturmovik.ru/topic/64-messerschmitt-bf110-v-boyah-v-rajone-stalingrada-vii42-ii43/

[Freycinet]

Jason said in one of the very earliest info posts about BoS and the following sims that will be made IF BoS IS A SUCCESS that they will sell Theatres, not Planes. This is the major difference from RoF.

 

So, there won't be individual add-on planes coming out but new theatres with new planes. I am convinced that this means that the new planes coming out with the new theatres can then also be used in older theatres. So, say they make the Med after BoS, and the Med comes with 110's and Hurricanes and P-40's. Then those planes can also be flown in a BoS scenario if you have bought both sims.

 

Buying BoS without the 110 is not 'a bad investment'. It is an investment in a future with more theatres of war being released. If BoS bombs then none of it will happen. And, please, for this first release don't demand every single plane that could possibly fit into a theatre of war at a given period. The developers have to work within very tight constraints because the hi-fidelity sim genre isn't exactly a bestseller. If the series takes off we can expect fully-fledged scenarios down the road.