Would you rather have a new Battle of X that follows BOM and BOS(plane capabilities) or would you like something new?

[Dutchvdm]

It's less about the number of aircraft as the nine AI crew members per and their respective responsibilities/programming/scripts.

 

True. But the end result stays the same. For a game like EAW with playable heavy's you need maybe a different engine and another angle to playing the game. EAW had "skip to next waypoint" options because no one is going to fly from England to Bremen realtime or even with 2x time compression. MP will be an issue as well, or Friday night bombernight is going to be bomberweekend.

 

Grt Martijn

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

There were lots of bomber boys on the old '46 dogfight maps and they usually flew co-operatively (except the B-29's because - BEAST). That is what airstarts are really supposed to be for. So they don't have to spend the entire round climbing. Fighters should always have to take off and land IMHO. 

 

Still need to a work around for those AI crew in BO_X.

[MikeDitka]

I don't see why a PTO add on would do poorly. I can understand a Russian developer not being able to source accurate information on American and Japanese aircraft, of course.

 

I get an attitude from a lot of gaming friends here in the States that own and play DCS that the theater is a big reason they don't want Il-2. Give them a P-38, P-51 or P-47 and some Japanese "targets" and you have a new player base to replace the LW-obsessed fliers. Until then they're gonna stick with the only sim to represent "their" airforce over the last decade.

 

If I were to gamble on the question, I would bet the PTO won't happen due to lack of historical sources for modeling and performance, and not any estimations of what sells to what markets.

[TheElf]

Virtual LW pilots are very large slice of the whole customer cake.Cut them off and you can start packing your personal belongings from the office into the cartonbox. 

 

 

no, no, no....its the vast Russian market that keeps this franchise afloat.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Don't know if this black-white-national-biased-preferrence-whatever thinking is doing good to the discussion. Personally I love to fly Luftwaffe aircraft and therefore approve a theatre feauturing more types but I'd equally (if not more) welcome a nice Pacific setting with USN vs IJN aircraft.

 

We have to consider that the Luftwaffe has fought in the most noteable theatres in WW2 and has born many high honored aces, which in return helped them it build up a strong reputation during and after WW2.

[Yogiflight]

I don´t think that pacific theatre would have the problem that all the german players would lose the interest on the game, because I think many of us, like me, would also love to fly in pacific theatre, especially if this would mean starting and landing on aircraft carriers. The problem might more likely be, will there be enough players for the japanese side, or won´t most of the players use american aircrafts, what would be a great problem for MP.

[LLv24_Zami]

I fly all planes that are available. Less bombers than others but I fly them too occasionally. I will fly allied planes when they are added to BoS. And I am sure they will be added some day. No nationality or plane question for me. And I think it shouldn`t be that to the others either. Enjoy the different and great planes that we have now and what is coming.

 

I hope that next battle will still be on eastern front. Kuban is my favorite as I have stated before. But if BoS goes to med/pacific whatever, I will fly those battles with same enjoyment as I have done now. In any case, interesting times at the beginning of 2016.

[Brano]

It is not vast Russian market.Devs stated that the customer pie is roughly split in thirds in-between Russia,Europe and USA.And from my experience half of that pie,whatever region you take,it's at least 50% LW pilots who would hardly touch anything else that was not produced in 3rd Reich.

[II./JG77_Manu*]

I really don't get this focusing on only one nation when it comes to WW2 planes. Why shouldn't anybody be interested in other planes then the ones "his ancestors fought"? Really don't get this short-minded attitude. I'd fly everything they throw at me, i don't mind if the German's constructed it, or the US, or Australia or somebody else. The most fun in those simulators comes from variaton, in my opinion, really feeling the difference in construction between the different partys of the war.

If there will be a pacific theatre, i'd gladly fly japanese planes, they have awesome planes, Zero for it's time the dream of a turnfighter, same for Ki43, Hayate very powerful plane, excells at everything, and in addition able to outturn every american one, N1K climbing abilties like the 109 with 4 cannons, B7A2 awesome looking torpedo attack plane, why on earth would somebody not like to fly those awesome planes? Really can't understand some people here...

[DD_Arthur]

I really don't get this focusing on only one nation when it comes to WW2 planes. Why shouldn't anybody be interested in other planes then the ones "his ancestors fought"? Really don't get this short-minded attitude. I'd fly everything they throw at me, i don't mind if the German's constructed it, or the US, or Australia or somebody else. The most fun in those simulators comes from variaton, in my opinion, really feeling the difference in construction between the different partys of the war.

If there will be a pacific theatre, i'd gladly fly japanese planes, they have awesome planes, Zero for it's time the dream of a turnfighter, same for Ki43, Hayate very powerful plane, excells at everything, and in addition able to outturn every american one, N1K climbing abilties like the 109 with 4 cannons, B7A2 awesome looking torpedo attack plane, why on earth would somebody not like to fly those awesome planes? Really can't understand some people here...

 

Agree completely.  Although I wouldn't want to tell people how they should play, I can't quite understand why anyone would only use half the sim they've paid for.

[7.GShAP/Silas]

If people were only interested in flying the aircraft that their home nation flew against in "the war", then you wouldn't see such an even spread of the people who fly combat sims, regardless of national origin, who gravitate to the Luftwaffe.  And I believe that the two factors that cause this are wanting to fly the finest machines available(in the case of BoS/BoM there is no competition on that technical front) , and the fact that all of the greatest air soldiers of the war(The top ~110 ace spots are German, I believe?) were Axis pilots. You would see the same with a multiplayer armor sim, I'm sure.  Can you sit and talk about the technical problems of the tiger or panther tank and their grave strategic implications?  Absolutely, and you would be right.  But that doesn't change the fact that they were iconic in the extreme, are aesthetically pleasing to many and that the top tank crews were German.  It's dramatic stuff, many people like putting themselves into the role of legendary great soldiers.

 

That's my guess as to that thing.  I still hope Kuban is next.

Edited November 19, 2015 by Silas

[Brano]

Agree completely.  Although I wouldn't want to tell people how they should play, I can't quite understand why anyone would only use half the sim they've paid for.

It is also strange attitude for me,but thats the reality and there are such people.If they could,they would only buy messer or Fw.The rest is just pool of targets for them.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

There is an aspect of historical reenactment to any game/simulator that focuses on real events that many people ignore. Developers time and again have to remind the players that the majority of users fly on single player, while the vocal minority is online.

 

There is also the factor many people are forgetting: while sales is important, if you make a product exclusively based on what an audience wants, everybody would be doing the same thing. The biggest share of the pie will always be the War Thunder, the Ace Combat or whatever else that allows people to fly without too many demands while still getting their share of combat thrill.

 

Then there's the high-end stuff, including civilian sims (MSFS, X-Plane) and military (Il-2, DCS, RoF). While MSFS and X-Plane allow for a sandbox environment, the military flight sims have set out with a mission and that's the beauty of it. DCS dates back to Flanker, and while they could have reached more of an audience by making the sim about the F-16 flying over Iraq instead, it has lived for two decades now by focusing on 4 Russian aircraft + 2 American flying over the Black Sea, and that's what made it so unique and original.

 

My point is, if you have a good product that people can consume, you just need to sell it to them. There's no need to do exactly what's predictable if you know your vision can appeal and you have an idea of how to sell it. The new and old Il-2 series serve as testament to that, as does Rise of Flight and also DCS (nobody gave a damn about the Ka-50 back then for example, yet once it was demonstrated to be a beast everyone was all over it and still is nearly 10 years on).

[Brano]

I think 1CGS is well aware of their customer pool and have their marketing forecasts done.I see a potential in mediteranean scenario for El Alamein/Tunisia 42-43 scenario.After Kuban.There they can introduce land-lease pack like it has been done in old sturm (boston/havoc,airacobra,spit V,hurri - although this was introduced with Forgotten battles specially for Finland vs USSR) and the rest of the planes for LW and italians can be freely recycled from BoS/BoM.Maybe adding Saetta and Sparviero on top of it and add one more US fighter - P-38.

 Hardcore VVS fans may come a bit short out of this,but still 2 thirds of customer pool will be satisfied together with ever present LW crowd.

[-TBC-AeroAce]

Thinking outside the box how about il2-Norwegian Campaign.

 

U have Germany, UK, Norway, Polish, French all there

Edited November 19, 2015 by [TBC]AeroACE

[Brano]

I can imagine any such "not mainstream" map as 3rd party work.I doubt 1CGS will do it themselves.

[Matt]

Invasion of Sicily could work too. Atleast it could have a few US and British planes. Landscape would be interesting too and anti-ship warfare could add a bit of variety and it could even have carriers. And it's not really over-representated.

[MikeDitka]

Just to keep whipping the horse while it draws its final breaths - I would love to fly the B-25 in this engine.

 

Has always been one of my favorite WWII aircraft.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

With calls for Italy, Sicily, Gibraltar and North Aftrica....................what does MTO mean to you? I thought it encompassed all of the above (and then some). I don't mind breaking up the MTO by region or year but the planeset for any set time period is going to be similar is it not? Maybe North Africa is one map and everything north is a different map. Gonna have to look at the BOS map and see how it compares for square footage now.

Edited November 19, 2015 by [LBS]HerrMurf

[CheeseGromit]

Agree completely.  Although I wouldn't want to tell people how they should play, I can't quite understand why anyone would only use half the sim they've paid for.

 

Looking at that the other way around, the question of why would I buy a sim when I'm only going to use half of it was something that I thought about a lot before buying BoS. It's why I made suggestions about releasing nation specific packs and it's why I'm not planning on getting BoM, at least until after I see the future plans for this game and probably a sale.

 

Having said that, for me at least it's more about specific aircraft (and tanks), than nations. Nations are definitely part of it but my interest is in flying (driving) the more iconic aircraft (tanks) of WW2, the ones that were in the books I read that helped form my interest in WW2. My influences were in the western front and pacific.

 

Sometimes gaming can help form new interests but I think in most cases people probably play games that appeal to their interests. In my case I'm more interested in the vehicles of WW2 than I am in flight sim, which is why I'm looking at the aircraft rather than flying everything. I can accept that I'm perhaps not part of the target audience for this game and will cherry pick the content that interests me, price permitting.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

There are people who really like tomatoes but not bananas and others who really like bananas but abhor tomatoes.  I wouldn't tell someone they have to eat a banana to really appreciate their tomatoes. Nor would I somehow construe they love Italy and hate Equador based upon that.

 

......and where the hell is Finkeren with that rhubarb pie? (Running joke from EA. You had to be there. Oh, nevermind..........................)

Edited November 19, 2015 by [LBS]HerrMurf

[Gump]

...

Having said that, for me at least it's more about specific aircraft (and tanks), than nations. Nations are definitely part of it but my interest is in flying (driving) the more iconic aircraft (tanks) of WW2, the ones that were in the books I read that helped form my interest in WW2. My influences were in the western front and pacific.

...

.

yeah, this sounds close to the reason I want to fly the 'american' planes - not just because of 'ancestors'.

.

BoS has a good representation of some of the best, most iconic german fighters, and it would be great to also experience some of the other greats that BoS doesnt offer, and seems to historically require other theaters. ironically, I am flying almost always in the Russian planes so far, mostly because I feel they are outclassed by the german fighters and I usually try to learn from the disadvantaged pov. but I am not real thrilled with the Russian fighter choices. I don't even consider the p40 a choice - not even competitive and, again, already outdated at the beginning of the war. in other words, i'd like to fly the greats against the greats, in great tactical and strategic applications.

.

I wonder how hard it is to create a plane/fm...

[=81FG=HellKitten]

Im bit tired of the Eastern front nw hehe.

I wish the nxt one will be focused on the Pacific War, or the Western European War.

[=LD=Strat]

I've always really enjoyed early-mid war scenarios, but in the case of this series, I'd love to see some late war aircraft modeled. I believe the physics in the game would really give you a true sense of the power these aircraft had and the quirks that came along with that. Some of the late model 109s (G-10, K4 etc...) would truly be a handful to fly, while some of the allied Soviet & U.S aircraft would be a bit tamer... Heck the later variants of the Spitfire (Griffon engine) would really give you a sense of torque with the 5-bladed prop out front!

Edited November 23, 2015 by Strat

[Bearcat]

I think the Kuban, Kursk or Murmansk would all be a good place to go but what I would like to see starting with close to the time of the pre order of the next series what ever it is would be a free to play version of BoS with the Lagg, F-4, Ju-87 and IL2 from BoS as free aircraft on the small Lapino map. Eliminate the Premium Edition for BoS altogether and add the two peremium planes and the extra maps to the Standard Edition of BoS. If you had the F2P version then the 4 planes in the F2P version would already be in your hangar. If you did not DL the F2P version and bought the standard version, when it updated it would put the F2P content in. Pricing on BoM would remain as it is now. I believe that this would be a very good thinbg for the marketing of the sim... 

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Yup, many of us made this recommendation shortly after BOS released (including you m'thinks). It would go much further than mouse assist in introducing the next wave of players/pilots/INCOME to this series.

[johncage]

don't waste work, they already have tanks. natural progression.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Yeah, don't do anything which might expand the player base. Good business plan there J.

[johncage]

according to devs, the tanks will expand the player base, don't want to go against devs do you?

[Livai]

!!!A new Battle of X comes this year that follows BoS and BoM!!! Time for speculate

[Xenunjeon88]

God, I'd pay $1000 just to get a decent campaign out of BOS... I'm chewing my way through all the IL-2 1946 campaigns and I can't imagine how 777 decided to make the campaign BOS BOM got after such great campaigns (generator and linear) in 1946...

Edited January 12, 2016 by Xenunjeon88

[Jason_Williams]

God, I'd pay $1000 just to get a decent campaign out of BOS... I'm chewing my way through all the IL-2 1946 campaigns and I can't imagine how 777 decided to make the campaign BOS BOM got after such great campaigns (generator and linear) in 1946...

 

Why pay more when you can play PWCG for free. It does everything you want. http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/19183-what-pat-wilson-campaign-generator-bos/

 

Jason

[von_Tom]

I haven't heard anything about the Murmansk map for a while.  Now that is a theatre that would be very interesting as you can have all lots of variants of the main LW aircraft, then add a host of non-Soviet aircraft eg A20, Spitfire, Hurricane etc.  You also get to fly over mountains and the sea.

 

Any news on this map anywhere?

 

von Tom

 

 

ps  If I could have one theatre I'd go for Malta/Med.

 

pps  Followed by the desert.

 

ppps Then Papua/New Guinea but that's probably a non-starter.

[Dutchvdm]

I would still like a Leningrad scenario. Long period which allows for lot's of aircraft with many different variants. I would Kuban would be nice to. 

 

Africa is cool, but the eastern front isn't fleshed out enough yet. I think. 

 

Grt Martijn

[Xenunjeon88]

Why pay more when you can play PWCG for free. It does everything you want. http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/19183-what-pat-wilson-campaign-generator-bos/

 

Jason

 

Because it's nowhere near as good as the 1946 campaigns. If I gave a choice to players, saying "Hey, do you guys want to keep playing PWCG, or a developed campaign in BOS reminiscent of 1946, I get the feeling a lot of people would chose 1946."

 

In the four missions I've played in PWCG in an F-4 three of which were ground attack missions, I've essentially killed 0 things... for some reason enemy AI flights have a hard-on for the player, while trying to bomb the mission objective, 6 I-16s tailed me and shot me down, even as my one wingman shot three of them down trying to clear my tail, all while they ignored him to get to me. 

 

The other two ground attack missions were to attack airfields, which when I got there, only 3 AAA units occupied the airport and there were no planes, trucks or tanks to bomb. And the last mission where I was finally asked to intercept something, nothing showed up and for nearly two hours I just flew around the same airspace, looking for something to shoot at.

 

And compare that with even the linear campaign in the original IL-2. You escort Ju-88 and enjoy the fireworks as bridges tanks convoys and buildings go up in smoke as a sort of reward for taking down the Yak-1s that tried to get them. Next you're strafing convoys yourself a week later, then doing fighter sweeps during thunderstorms and chasing down scouts the next.

 

I'm not saying it should be an exact carbon copy, but what was the experience I had with PWCG? Two hours of flying around after a 10 minute loading time? Having to quit the game after every mission? Deal with the confusing and prone to freezing GUI?

Edited January 12, 2016 by Xenunjeon88

[Plesski]

How about September 1939 campaign in Poland? I haven't seen one in any sim I know (but on the other hand I don't know much about sims). I know it would be very difficult in terms of balance, but that's never a primary goal in real sim, is it?

 

Y.

[Gunsmith86]

Xenunjeon88 

PWCG is still in development and many of the things you mention in your post will change in the next years.

The PWCG version we have now in Rise of Flight is far better as the IL2 1946 campaign and given some time the PWCG version in BoS will be too.

[touchdown42]

 

 

I'm not saying it should be an exact carbon copy, but what was the experience I had with PWCG? Two hours of flying around after a 10 minute loading time? Having to quit the game after every mission? Deal with the confusing and prone to freezing GUI?

 

Hi Xenunjeon88,

 

regarding the freezing UI, perhaps check, if you didn't unintentionally install the 32bit Java runtime on a 64bit system, had that as well.

After uninstalling 32bit Java and installing 64bit Java everything is fine, got this tip from the PWCG subforum.

 

And you don't have to close the prg, just Alt Tab after finishing the mission. Never had a problem with that.

 

But the long loading times are a mistery for me as well. After the bar reaches the right side of the window, which takes about 20-30 s. while loading from a SSD, i still have to wait for ~2 mins. until the mission starts. Not sure what happens, when, regarding to the progress bar, the mission is already loaded.

 

Most of the other problems are AI related and won't change with PWCG, perhaps the devs need to address this to make this game a little bit more single player friendly.

 

 

 

 

[Bando]

Also, if you have any sort of mission you dislike, (I had the feeling you disliked the ground attack missions in PWCG) you can discard that mission and generate a new one. 

I think PWCG is not at it's end of development as Patrick continues to update it. It is at the moment a very promising direction to go to as a SP.

 

About the targets at the airfield, you are correct and Patrick is aware of this. He promised to try to improve on that.

I do not know why the PWCG missions take so much longer to load compared to the vanilla campaign.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

My wishlist

 

Torpedoes

Drop tanks

A Murmansk map

More ships to destroy

P-39

Aircraft Carriers with an appropriate map (maybe med?)...I'd love to see how 777 would do carrier landings I think it would be epic