Jump to content
Han

Developer Diary, Part 113 - Discussion

Recommended Posts

Dear friends, it looks like the tanks announce caused too much fuss. Please don't imagine anything redundant. We don't make a killer of popular MMO tank games (we don't know how to do it and our game is about completely different things), we work in different genres and for different playbases. Don't imagine anything impossible so you won't be dissapointed by the game not meeting your expectations.

 

We just added controllable tanks to IL-2. There are several interesting things, for example you can feel the enourmous size of the map, see what tank engagements looked like, this differs from most other tank games enormously. They differ like avia sim differs from a game about shooting planes. Distances are long, you can't see anything, etc. This kind of game can't be really popular. We didn't want to make tanks to reap $$$ from players. In the first place, we wanted to show how tank engagements really looked like for those who are interested in this. It's like a documentary, not a blockbuster.

Engine created for avia sim imposes many restrictions for tank simulation, limiting its visual epicness. Content looks less detailed (it was created to look good at a distance), trees seem too big and they don't fall, fences are ethereal - these are big no-noes for a good mass market game. We created tanks so you could experience how it was from the other side of IL-2 aiming reticle, from the point of view of its main target. It gives a whole new meaning to watching a dogfight, knowing that if a fighter loses it, then a survived Strurmovik will toast you and there is very little you can do about this. And of course it is exciting to know that all these things are controlled by real people.

We didn't spend time to invent a special balanced gameplay that would make playing in a tank interesting or rewarding, we decided to show you the WWII era warfare from another perspective. So I'm asking politely, dear customers, don't add excess hype to the mix. These are just tanks, yes, they are realistic, yes, they can move on 120+ thousands of square kilometers, yes, they have physics and interiors, yes, it is scary, etc. But this is not a game to play holding a beer by any means. This is freaking hardcore.

Well, how could I be less excited after the last sentences? :-)

 

But thank for the explanation. I was allways wondeting about it. The wave of tank popularity double number of visitors in my local tank musem (and I mean thousands), probalby becouse of those MMO (jujge from t-shirts). And so discussion I notice around slowly went from "What is KV?" to "How Maybach double differential steering works exactly?"

 

So, I think that hardcore tank sim could be quite poppular (even with those fences and such) now as those MMO games only offers arcadish experience and many players are already "beyond" that, having no alternative.

 

But we shall see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great news from Loft I think... At least we know they aren't going to waste time on developing a hard core and detailed tank sim. That would just waste time and resources when what we really need in a flight sim is progression to more maps and theatres, more detailed aircraft, and continued improvements on what the game already has.

 

Thank you Loft...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unreasonable, re-read my post again. My argument is strictly about playability. The Panzer III is going to be outclassed. I guess it's fair though, BOS opened with the F4 vs LaGG 3.

 

*rant over

 

OK I re-read again (phew) and you are talking about playability, but you mention the Pzkw III as an infantry support tank. This is incorrect, it was the mainstay of the Panzer divisions throughout 1942. It was outclassed by the T34 in some respects, but had better optics, radio (only soviet command tanks had radios) and internal layout, so while tank for tank the T34 might have had an edge, platoon vs platoon the Pzkw IIIL could be competitive. So no need to rant!  :salute:

 

Anyway I see from Loft's posts that there is no intention to create a tank game as such (good) - I am sure we will all find it interesting to experiment with the vehicles for a change of pace from time to time.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Playable tanks?

 

I suddenly want to see Kursk as the next map...

 

sp4_2.jpg

Edited by Cybermat47
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It did, on the C model, but I'm failry sure that Cs were never operational over Stalingrad or Moscow. It would be like having an unlock that turns the Il-2 into an Il-10.

 

 

I know about the C Model, but it also isn't "full of guns." And an A model with a hard nose "full of guns" never existed.

 

It had 3x7.62 and 1x20mm facing forward, which the latter the A-4 already could do. So it just removes the bottom gondola, adds all metal nose, and puts 3 weak 7.62s in there.

 

It's also a totally different model. Therefore, no, we don't get that and you're right about the Il-2 to Il-10 - exactly what it would be like.

 

 

well a Ju-87 D with BK 3,7 didn't exist either. that would be an Ju-87 G, yet we have it in game  ;)

 

Asgar wins !!!  Fatality !!! Double Flawless Victory !!!   :ph34r:

Edited by KG62_Gielow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gielow, a lot of Ju-87Gs were in fact Ju-87Ds fitted with the cannons, so the comparison doesn't apply here.

Any Gs on Stalingrad ??? Gun pods ??

 

 

"These gun pods were fitted to a Ju 87 D-1, W.Nr 2552 as "Gustav the tank killer". The first flight of the machine took place on 31 January 1943, piloted by Hauptmann Hans-Karl Stepp.[68] The continuing problems with about two dozens of the Ju 88P-1, and slow development of the Hs 129 B-3, each of them equipped with a large, PaK 40-based, autoloading Bordkanone BK 7,5 cm (2.95 in) cannon in a conformal gun pod beneath the fuselage, meant the Ju 87G was put into production. In April 1943, the first production Ju 87 G-1s were delivered to front line units."

 

 

Maybe we should forget about fun and delete gun pods from game right now for historic accuracy  :P 

Edited by KG62_Gielow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am very happy with this update... happiness is a habit that is the outcome of all the good work being done. The product and support is very good. Thanks guys. Regarding the tanks, if you guys were in my business i would give you a bonus, excellent intiative and expanding the business make so much sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Maybe we should forget about fun and delete gun pods from game right now for historic accuracy  :P 

I'd actually prefer to research the possibility of Ju-87 Ds with 37mm cannons operating near Stalingrad, to sate my appetite for historical accuracy and fun :biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No Gs in Stalingrad indeed, that's a different story and you can definitely question it. That being said, the Ju-87 first got its big guns during testing in early 1943. And of course, they can easily implement this in later scenarios like Kursk and etc. where it was operational.

 

That asides, I believe the degree of modification required to turn a Ju-87D into a Ju-87G is way smaller than the one needed to transform a Ju-88A-4 into a Ju-88C or Ju-88P. If I remember correctly the first Ju-88C variants were built upon the Ju-88A-1 anyway so it's hard to field-modify a Ju-88A-4 into a Ju-88A-1 and then transform it into a Ju-88C-2 from there. On top of that, unlike the Ju-87G in 1943, as far as I know there was no operational need for the Ju-88C in the first two years of the Eastern Front.

 

Perhaps that influenced their decision.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^

 

Also, turning a Ju-88 A into a C is turning a bomber into a ground attack/heavy fighter aircraft, which we already have with the Bf-110.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First operational use of JU-87 with 37mm was 18 march 43 with D model, led by Otto Weis, Cmndr of Versuchskommando für Panzerbekämpfung experimental Unit, which had started development in Dec 42 at Rechlin

 

after successful combat trials it was designated G model, but was mostly field mod done at the front, with deleted dive brakes which could be re-fitted,

 

so a G1 could also be a D1-3 at the same time :)

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No Gs in Stalingrad indeed, that's a different story and you can definitely question it. That being said, the Ju-87 first got its big guns during testing in early 1943. And of course, they can easily implement this in later scenarios like Kursk and etc. where it was operational.

 

That asides, I believe the degree of modification required to turn a Ju-87D into a Ju-87G is way smaller than the one needed to transform a Ju-88A-4 into a Ju-88C or Ju-88P. If I remember correctly the first Ju-88C variants were built upon the Ju-88A-1 anyway so it's hard to field-modify a Ju-88A-4 into a Ju-88A-1 and then transform it into a Ju-88C-2 from there. On top of that, unlike the Ju-87G in 1943, as far as I know there was no operational need for the Ju-88C in the first two years of the Eastern Front.

 

Perhaps that influenced their decision.

 

Very good point. I think the standard A4 with the additional 20 mm cannon in the gondola with suffice. I would think this might be historical accurate?

 

Grt Martijn

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good point. I think the standard A4 with the additional 20 mm cannon in the gondola with suffice. I would think this might be historical accurate?

 

Yes, the 20 mm MGFF would be a historical accurate armament option for the Ju-88. Moreover it was possible to arrest the forward firing flexible MG in a fixed position, so it could be aimed by the pilot.
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thank's LOFT for your explanation , thats reassuring for me  :)  

 

 

Dear friends, it looks like the tanks announce caused too much fuss. Please don't imagine anything redundant. We don't make a killer of popular MMO tank games (we don't know how to do it and our game is about completely different things), we work in different genres and for different playbases. Don't imagine anything impossible so you won't be dissapointed by the game not meeting your expectations.
 
We just added controllable tanks to IL-2. There are several interesting things, for example you can feel the enourmous size of the map, see what tank engagements looked like, this differs from most other tank games enormously. They differ like avia sim differs from a game about shooting planes. Distances are long, you can't see anything, etc. This kind of game can't be really popular. We didn't want to make tanks to reap $$$ from players. In the first place, we wanted to show how tank engagements really looked like for those who are interested in this. It's like a documentary, not a blockbuster.
Engine created for avia sim imposes many restrictions for tank simulation, limiting its visual epicness. Content looks less detailed (it was created to look good at a distance), trees seem too big and they don't fall, fences are ethereal - these are big no-noes for a good mass market game. We created tanks so you could experience how it was from the other side of IL-2 aiming reticle, from the point of view of its main target. It gives a whole new meaning to watching a dogfight, knowing that if a fighter loses it, then a survived Strurmovik will toast you and there is very little you can do about this. And of course it is exciting to know that all these things are controlled by real people.
We didn't spend time to invent a special balanced gameplay that would make playing in a tank interesting or rewarding, we decided to show you the WWII era warfare from another perspective. So I'm asking politely, dear customers, don't add excess hype to the mix. These are just tanks, yes, they are realistic, yes, they can move on 120+ thousands of square kilometers, yes, they have physics and interiors, yes, it is scary, etc. But this is not a game to play holding a beer by any means. This is freaking hardcore.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the 20 mm MGFF would be a historical accurate armament option for the Ju-88. Moreover it was possible to arrest the forward firing flexible MG in a fixed position, so it could be aimed by the pilot.

love that function. I'm also still hoping for the 13mm MG 131 for the rear gunner :)

Edited by I./ZG76Asgar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We created tanks so you could experience how it was from the other side of IL-2 aiming reticle, from the point of view of its main target. It gives a whole new meaning to watching a dogfight, knowing that if a fighter loses it, then a survived Strurmovik will toast you and there is very little you can do about this.

 

Something like this you had in mind?  :biggrin:  

 

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very Good News . Excellent Job ...

More near to The Perfection .

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so a G1 could also be a D1-3 at the same time :)

 

Correct. And a G-2 was off the D-5, with the added hard points for the BKs. A D-5 with Stuvi gunsights would be great! HINT HINT!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow...this is a great way for the sim to go ahead!

Thnx!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This does not involve tanks but I wanted to mention it as an example how the game and especially AI has evolved and improved.

 

I was flying campaign mission with 4 Bf-109f4

to strike enemy airfield. Flying low towards target, at the frontline we encountered several

enemy planes. I ordered wingmen to follow me and went through. Flight of Sturmoviks flew just front of us at very close range. My wingmen didn't even try to engage but they stick with

me towards the target. It was great to see!

 

My compliments to the AI guy for the work he has done! Lots of improvements lately and it is very important for us SP guys. Thanks!

Edited by Zami
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely love the idea to have playable tanks in this sim, even more with these features: realism over balance, cooperative play in one vehicle, detailed systems modeling! :happy: Caaan`t wait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, very annoying!

If you need to alter things further then you can only do that by posting again, instead of adding to your original post!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also love the idea of playable tanks, but we need to have commanders position in them, because with only gunsight and drivers position you are almost blind and it has nothing to do with realism.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My two cents.

 

1C - 777 = Business company

 

They have an amazing engine with the best physic we have ever seen in a flight sim and not only.

 

They MUST do it, because they MUST improve their business: more options, a bigger market, more customers, more money, more budget, more human resources, more projects, more modules, ecc. ecc....and....

 

...more aircrafts. They could cover Ju-52 development with......Panther and Tiger sales for ex.

 

What makes a song a chart-topper, a book a bestseller or film a blockbuster? Crucial for its success is the story that is told with it. This law applies to all entertainment media seeking for large selling numbers - computer games are no exception.

Flight simulators of the species Jane’s.., IL-2 Sturmovik, RoF, CoD, BoS etc. tell their story by means of their SP-campaign. While BoS leaves all other flight simulator games far behind in the disciplines of FM, DM, graphics, flight experience and realism, the narrative of its story is terrible. Here the narrative is left  to a machine (a mission generator). Good stories contain excitement, joy, suffering, sex, passion. Only people with a special talent are able to pack all these emotions in a story. An automaton is a very bad storyteller.

With six small handcrafted missions the developers of BoS have proven that they can also tell a good story. If all the efforts of the recent years put in this fantastic simulation should not only serve a relatively small group of hardcore -MP, then we eventually need to create a "man conceived" campaign. A PWCG-BoS is an important step in the right direction but it does not replace a handmade campaign. The "Rebirth of Honor" campaign of the original IL-2 is a good example of how a campaign might look like. People may have diverse opinions concerning the content of RoH but its immersive storyline and dramatic art is exemplary. That will bring us back the many lost IL-2 players and not new tanks.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Asgar wins !!!  Fatality !!! Double Flawless Victory !!!

 

Ehm...no:

These gun pods were fitted to a Ju 87 D-1, W.Nr 2552 as "Gustav the tank killer". The first flight of the machine took place on 31 January 1943, piloted by Hauptmann Hans-Karl Stepp. The continuing problems with about two dozens of the Ju 88P-1, and slow development of the Hs 129 B-3, each of them equipped with a large, PaK 40-based, autoloading Bordkanone BK 7,5 cm (2.95 in) cannon in a conformal gun pod beneath the fuselage, meant the Ju 87G was put into production. In April 1943, the first production Ju 87 G-1s were delivered to front line units. The two 37 mm (1.46 in) cannons were mounted in under-wing gun pods, each loaded with two six-round magazines of armour-piercing tungsten carbide-cored ammunition. With these weapons, the Kanonenvogel ("cannon-bird"), as it was nicknamed, proved spectacularly successful in the hands of Stuka aces such as Rudel. The G-1 was converted from older D-series airframes, retaining the smaller wing, but without the dive brakes. The G-2 was similar to the G-1 except for use of the extended wing of the D-5. 208 G-2s were built and at least a further 22 more were converted from D-3 airframes.
 
Only a handful of production Gs were committed in the Battle of Kursk. On the opening day of the offensive, Hans-Ulrich Rudel flew the only "official" Ju 87 G, although a significant number of Ju 87D variants were fitted with the 37 mm (1.46 in) cannon, and operated as unofficial Ju 87 Gs before the battle. 
 
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Superb news! Seems as if the IL-2 series is going ARMA. I am all for it. Thanks.

Bought IL2: BoM just a minute ago to support you guys. I like what you have in store for us! 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A more or less fully fledged tank sim, like a modern version of Graviteam's Steel Fury (which Graviteam won't be doing) with 777's twist on things would have been a dream but if the graphical environment doesn't allow it then so be it. The world really needs a high-fidelity WW2 tank sim. It's just a pity that IL2 won't be it after looking like being so close.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right mate... we do need a new WWII dedicated tank sim, I have been wishing for one for a long time, but I'm so glad that they are not going to do it with this flight sim!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The motivation to go for tanks and objectives will increase with player controlled tanks. And this will be a good thing for everybody, even for those not interested in driving tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Limitation for "leaning" - great step forward for realism !!!

Tanks in IL-2 - why not :) Its always to better burn in the "can" human player than AI.

 

Good job Dev`s.

 

p.s.1

When you fix performance of the planes in the game ?
p.s.2

When Yak-1 will fly like normal aircraft ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...