Jump to content
=362nd_FS=Hiromachi

Il-2 Sturmovik : Battle of Burma - an idea for a future expansion

  

158 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you find presented idea interesting and would you like it to be future expansion ?

    • Yes, I find the idea interesting and I'd like it to be developed.
      125
    • I don't care what will be next, I'll buy whatever it is.
      16
    • No, I dont find the idea interesting and dont think it should be future expansion.
      17


Recommended Posts

Hello everyone, since the time to choose future expansion is approaching and its becoming an increasingly discussed topic I figured some time ago that I'd prepare a proposition for an expansion, trying to not only pick a map and plane set but build it around actual events with a background. That would give it actual depth needed for a potential consideration.


 


So I came up with an idea to take next game into a jungles and mountains of Burma and India border, presenting the major battles from the period of late 1943 to late 1944. Burma was a theater of operations since Japanese invasion on Malaya, and as the war progressed Japanese have reached the borders of India but could not cross it due to increasing Allied resistance. Valleys and hills of Burma and India saw air operations for 3 following years, with rather stable front being possibly the longest continuous fights in same region of the world war two.


 


2SSbGb.jpg


 


The Story


A choice of a proper theater not only requires map, aircraft but as I assumed also an interesting story behind. And as such battles of Arakan, Imphal, Kohima and later counteroffensives towards Irrawady provide one of the most interesting and unique story-lines possible. Idea behind the Japanese offensive came from Lieutenant-General Mutaguchi Renya, who was impressed by the apparent success of Wingate's expedition (a Chindits expedition). Throughout the latter half of 1943 he lobbied shamelessly across the Burma Area Army for permission to do so. He argued that at the very least the occupation of Imphal (the capital of Manipur and the location of the British IV Corps) would prevent the British attempting to repeat their offensive into Burma on a larger scale. In this he was supported from an unlikely source. Following the collapse of British resistance in Malaya and Singapore in 1942 large numbers of Indian soldiers had fallen into Japanese hands, 16,000 eventually forming the Indian National Army. The political leader of this movement - Subhas Chandra Bose - argued that with the INA in the vanguard of an offensive into India it might even topple the Raj, by setting off an unstoppable conflagration of anti-British sentiment among the native population. Mutaguchi eagerly grasped such ideas as further justification for an offensive.


 


So it was that in March 1944, when on every other front the Japanese were on the strategic defensive, Japan launched a vast, audacious offensive (Operation C) deep into India with the entire 115,000-strong Fifteenth Army. The commander of Fifteenth Army was instructed to mount a strong pre-emptive strike against Imphal before the onset of the monsoon in May. To help, a strong diversionary attack was planned for Arakan (Operation Z) a month before. If Lieutenant-General 'Bill' Slim, commander of the British Fourteenth Army, was deceived into thinking that this was the focus of an offensive against India, and moved his strategic reserves to deal with it, Operation Z would have done its duty, allowing Mutaguchi the best possible odds in Manipur. At the same time aggressive Japanese operations in the Hukawng Valley would also prevent interference in Operation C by Lieutenant-General 'Vinegar Joe' Stilwell's Chinese.

 

f0Rqis.png

 

During the following operations an air operations played a crucial role in Allied victory, it was due to the ability of Allied aircraft to perform attacks on Japanese Army front units and supply units, provide necessary supplies and reinforcements as well as evacuate wounded that victory became possible.Troops on the ground, even small numbers who found themselves on long-range patrol, or who were cut off by Japanese encirclement, could depend on rapid and accurate air drops of essential supplies - including fuel, ammunition, food and water - when required. In the three months between April and June 1944 the total number of Allied air sorties including transport flights directly in support of Imphal and Kohima exceeded 30,000.

 

The Army was taught how to cooperate with its various arms and services, and with the Royal Air Force (RAF) and Indian Air Force (IAF). Signals, engineer and artillery courses blossomed, as did air-to-ground cooperation courses, infantry and tank cooperation training, parachute, air landing and glider training, and innumerable other courses and instruction dealing with everything from the provision of air-dropped supplies to the proper crossing of rivers.


 



 


Thus, the place I think that should be chosen is Northern Burma as well as parts of four Indian states -  Mizoram, Manipur, Nagaland and Assam. Those were the areas where most fierce and hard battles took place -  Arakan, Imphal and Kohima. All of those involved a massive aerial operations carried by both sides, the Allied side trying to supply and support the ground forces while Japanese trying to prevent that. I took some time and basing on Pacificwrecks website built a map of all airfields in the area :


 


https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=zZHyq_LjyF4Q.kbWyJOrEzXz0&usp=sharing


 


The Japanese major airfields were in Myitkyina, Shwebo and Magwe but as the campaign moved on, Japanese came as close to area as possible capturing an airfield at Tamu, being less than 50 kilometers away from first allied airfield at Palel. As its visible Allies constructed airfields inside Imphal valley and around it, some of them being threatened and captured during the operation but others were still maintained and used for the air bridge providing the supplies. 


 


2UsJDi.jpg


 


This choice of time and place allows to portray a major battles occurring in Burma at a decent size territories but not very large (like Crimea and Kuban, Northern Africa or Solomon Islands). The presented area is less than 100 000 km2 and could be potentially even decreased if need be, though that would limit major Japanese airfields which were usually placed further back due to superior range of Japanese aircraft. 


 


The timeframe 


The exact entry date could be the beginning of December of 1943 when first and only Japanese Army-Navy joint operation called Ryu Ichi Go Sakusen was carried, being a combined bombing operation against Calcutta in which more than 150 aircraft participated. However the main events should be focused around  period starting with Japanese offensive through the Chin and Somra Hills, next stage being a siege of Imphal and Kohima, than Allied counteroffensive eventually leading into a Japanese retreat and Allied forces entering northern Burma and pushing the Japanese south. Unlike in 1942 and 1943 the monsoon period did not bring campaigning to an end, even though weather still reduced the possibility of the flying but still leaving the room for possible chapters (battle of Myitkyina, crossing of Irrawady, etc.)


 


The Geography 


Burma is characterized by its central lowlands with the Sittaung Valley and Chindwin Valley and the smaller mountain ranges. The Central Valley Region is ringed by steep, rugged highlands, with the country's highest point at the 5,881 m Hkakabo Razi located in the northern end of the country. This mountain is part of a series of parallel ranges that run from the foothills of the Himalaya through the border areas with Assam, Nagaland and Mizoram. The Arakan Mountains in the west run from Manipur into western Burma southwards through Rakhine State almost to Cape Negrais in the shores of the Bay of Bengal.


 



 


The internal road system was primitive in the extreme, often amounting to little more than dirt tracks. The main all-weather routes were from Rangoon to Mandalay, from Meiktila through the Shan State, from Toungoo through the Karen Hills to Loilem, from Rangoon to Prome and then on to Mandalay, although this last was not always passable in heavy rain.

 


Hawker_Hurricane_attack_bridge_in_Burma.


 


Indian state of Nagaland is largely a mountainous. The Naga Hills rise from the Brahmaputra Valley in Assam to about 600 m and rise further to the southeast, as high as 1,800 m. Mount Saramati at an elevation of 3,841.00 m is the state's highest peak; this is where the Naga Hills merge with the Patkai Range in which form the boundary with Burma. Rivers such as the Doyang and Diphu to the north, the Barak river in the southwest, dissect the entire state. 20 percent of the total land area of the state is covered with wooded forest, a heaven for flora and fauna. The evergreen tropical and the sub tropical forests are found in strategic pockets in the state. 


 


 


Proposed Aircraft set 


                                            Allied  aircraft   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Japanese Aircraft


Standard


                  Hawker Hurricane MK II B/C   - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  Mitsubishi A6M2 or A6M5 


                    Supermarine Spitfire Mk VIII  - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  Nakajima  Ki-43 Model II Late or Model III 


                            Vultee Vengeance Mk II - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  Mitsubishi Ki-51 


               North American B-25 J Mitchell - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  Kawasaki Ki-48-IIc or Mitsubishi Ki-21-IIc


 


Premium


               North American P-51A Mustang - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Nakajima Ki-84 Hayate        


 


The reasons for a plane setup - In regard to Allied aircraft the choices are often simple, since the RAF was a main force in India due to the colonial background aircraft like Hawker Hurricane and Supermarine Spitfire are a must be. They were operated by almost all British units, with a few exceptions for Curtiss Mohawks or later a Thunderbolt II (British name for P-47 D-25), over a half of RAF Squadrons in that area operated Hurricanes and Spitfires. By the end of 1943 those were mostly Hurricanes II B or C models (5th Squadron, 28th Squadron, 34th Squadron, 6th Squadron, etc) as well as Hurricane IV (42nd Squadron). At this time Supermarine provided for RAF Squadrons in Burma a new variant of its iconic fighter, that is a Spitfire VIII starting with 152nd Squadron in late 1943, quickly replacing older Spitfire Vc in other units and by 1st July 1944 further nine Squadrons were equipped with those machines. It quickly became main RAF fighter in Far Eastern theater of war. 



 


Now in case of dive bomber / attacker the choice was not easy, there are aircraft like Bristol Beaufighter that are versatile and widely known however if there is an aircraft unique to this front than it certainly is Vultee Vengeance. RAF has neglected the design and development of the own dive bombers and eventually it was realized that infantry needs an lighter aircraft than medium bombers for effective pin-point support. In this case US provided British ally with a unique design. The first RAF squadrons (82nd and 110) received Vengeances in October 1942. The first dive bombing missions against Japanese forces were flown on 19 March 1943. A further two RAF squadrons in Burma received Vengeances, (84th and 45th), together with two squadrons of the Indian Air Force (IAF) - 7th and 8th. Vengeances were heavily deployed in support of the second Arakan campaign of 1943/44, and defending against the Japanese attacks on Imphal and Kohima.



 


The choice of medium bomber was on contrary easy, the North American B-25 was a common view on the Burmese sky, though it is also known that RAF operated in India Hudsons and Wellingtons (Mark X and Mark XIII). By 1944 a common variants operated in Burma were G, H and J models with the last one being more suited for strafing.


https://youtu.be/b0yEhl9chEY


 


 


The Allied Premium aircraft could either be a Thunderbolt II, Lockheed P-38 J or North American P-51A. All of those were present and used, however the first two were somehow less involved at given time (Thunderbolt II 135th Squadron stationed far in Colombo, while P-38 was continuously used by 459th Squadron). P-51A is a lesser known version of an iconic fighter powered by a more suited for low altitudes Allison engine, hence why I think it should be chosen. Its still a Mustang, an incredibly fast warbird but in its earlier configuration it would be interesting to see this particular one. Especially that current P-40E is also using Allison engine, though an earlier version, but still that could shorten the development time.


uuTiw3.jpg


 


 


 


In regard to the Japanese aircraft I tried to find a way to mark the presence of the famous Zero. I mean it's such a symbol of the Japanese aviation that almost any game without it would seem to be lacking something. This task was not easy, but the mentioned above operation Ryu Ichi Go Sakusen against Calcutta proved to be a perfect opportunity. In this operation Japanese Navy provided 27 A6M Zeros to protect less than a dozen of G4M bombers of the 705th Kokutai. Those Zeros belonged to 331st Kokutai, formed at Saeki on 1st July 1943 and initially provided with Nakajima-built A6M2 Zeros. However as the production of the A6M5 started in August, the unit by the end of 1943 had a mixed component of those two variants (hence why I left the choice). 331st Kokutai was initially tasked to protect the Andaman and Nicobar Islands (being stationed in Car Nicobar and Port Blair) while other detachments were sent to Mergui in southern Burma. In the early December 1943 the fighters moved to Magwe airfield (central Burma), eventually the Zeros were moved in March-April to Micronesia as the need arose to reinforce it. Other unit stationed briefly in Burma was 381st Kokutai. 


Based on this I think Zeke has a legitimate place in the plane set. 


136300386447313107501.JPG


 


The main Japanese fighter seen in Burma through all the years  was the Ki-43 Oscar, being operated by almost all Flying Regiments (Sentai in Japanese). In 1943 the standard in Burma became Model II, however in 1944 some units (50th and 64th Sentai, 26th and 33rd Sentai later as well) received a more modern Ki-43-III while others were continuously operating late variant of Ki-43-II . The new model was not that different from the older one, though it was powered by a new engine with better altitude performance and flight characteristics. While it never replaced Model II due to the fact that newest aircraft always had a priority in more important areas such as Homeland or Philippines, the fact is that both models were present during fighting and thus the choice is left again.


Hayabusa2.jpg


 


In case of single engine dive bomber or ground attacker Japanese Army really had only one aircraft that was present in Burma and that is Mitsubishi Ki-51, codename "Sonia". The aircraft was used by 71st Independent Flying Chutai, which was later incorporated into 83rd Sentai in late 1943. While the unit had withdrawn from Burma to Indonesia in the summer of 1944 it had left behind Ki-51s with their crews, attached to the 15th and 33rd Army Headquarters. Those machines not only were used in dive bombing and assault attacks but also later provided ammunition to the surrounded troops in the north Burma/China border area. 



 


Japanese Army operated two types of bombers in Burma, a Kawasaki Ki-48 and Mitsubishi Ki-21. Both were used in decent numbers, with the latter one being maybe a bit more popular. Ki-48 was by the Japanese nomenclature a light twin engine bomber, it was inspired by a known Tupolev SB-2 bomber and in its final variant could exceed 500 km/h and was provided with dive breaks thus in some way making it similar to the popular in Battle of Stalingrad Pe-2. The airplane was one of the first Japanese bombers (as well as described below Ki-21) provided with protection for the crew, with both self sealing tanks and armor for the pilot and gunners. Aircraft was used during the given period by 8th and 34th Sentai's.


Mitsubishi Ki-21 was a bit slower, but bigger and better protected machine. In Japanese nomenclature that was a twin engine heavy bomber capable of carrying more ordnance than Ki-48 but unable to perform a dive bombings. While the airplane was quickly becoming obsolete it was used by the Japanese until the end of the war, in Burma by 12th, 60th and 98th Sentai.



 


Finally the premium aircraft, being Nakajima Ki-84 "Hayate". It was one of the most popular machines in old Il-2 Pacific fighters and certainly should be a premium machine. While it never was seen in huge numbers like in Philippines, it still was present in Burma, being used by the 50th Sentai. It is a high performance machine with a great potential and a fair opponent for a P-51A.


 


It is also important to mention that there would be a need to present a secondary, Ai aircraft for supply and reconnaissance duties. Such workhorses for the Allies were C-47 Dakota and Stinson L-5 Sentinel. 


 


Ground Forces 


Since we have a possibility to play tanks in BoS I safely assume that in future such a possibility will be created for BoM as well, and thus thinking of any next expansion should leave some room for tanks. Most common Allied tanks in the area were M3 Lee and M3 Stuart, while Japanese deployed Type 97 Shinhoto Chi Ha and Type 95 Ha Go.


 


Summary 


 


To sum it up, this is basically a complex view on next possible expansion. The story behind it is great and most importantly it was always overshadowed by greater events in Salomon islands, New Guinea or Marianas which creates a huge possibility to present a unique and a bit unknown operations, honoring those pilots and other soldiers who fought there with bravery and desperation no different to soldiers fighting in Stalingrad, Normandy, Sicily or other places. The plane set is  also very specific and yet based on exact data from time and units participating in the events. I think it brings something to everyone, a maneuverable Zero and Oscar or fast and well armed Frank, Lily for Peshka fans and Ki-51 for ground pounders, if one wishes to fly the Japanese, if not then there is a Hurricane and Spitfire for all fans of RAF, B-25 and P-51 are legends and no need to add anything and there is that amazing Vultee Vengeance for hipsters !


A great variety of vehicles fighting in unique and beautiful conditions.  


 


  • Like 1
  • Upvote 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

one of my Favs.

nice write up. I suggest one change - the premium aircraft shouldn't be the best fighters, because people could argue about pay-to-win. Rather let's say unusual aircraft for the scenario (though i would like to have aircraft who actually took part, even if it was only low numbers). Apart from that i think it's fine :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought of that. But based on Spitfireperformance I think best fighter is Spitfire VIII which is standard set. I'd place my bet on it due to combination of speed, maneuverability and outstanding rate of climb. And as said, choice of Premium for Allies would spin around P-38 - P-47 - P-51. In this case I figured Allison Mustang would be most fun. Its also tiny bit of personal bias, since from the three I'd personally take Mustang.

In case of Japanese there is just no other option. Ki-84 was rather rare in Burma and adding it as standard would not be proper. Choice in standard is between Ki-43 - A6M - Ki-44 (also present but not as much as Ki-84). There were few Ki-61s in the area but were found unsuitable. 

So I see your point, but there also should be some justification to move Ki-84 to standard setup. And I find none. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that A-36A will be a good choice on a par with P-51A. And Ki-44 also deserves the right to life, rare aircraft in games (thanks gods, not in models :b).

Edited by MicroShket

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome write-up, thanks for the history lesson :)

 

I do hope we go there soon. As you know my heart is in the Black Sea but this would be a perfect expansion, and the Allied aircraft involved would pave way to the MTO-1943 scenario many are wishing for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that A-36A will be a good choice on a par with P-51A. And Ki-44 also deserves the right to life, rare aircraft in games (thanks gods, not in models :b).

A-36A was present indeed but not more than one unit used it and it was replaced by the end of 1944. Besides, there is already P-51A. Cool aircraft but we just cant have everything.

And same for Ki-44. It was present, few were given to 64th Sentai and Yasuhiko Kuroe mastered it but the only actually unit fully equipped with them was 87th Sentai, which moved to Burma in May 1944 and suffered very heavy losses leading to immediate pull out. There are some choices and some sacrifices have to be made. 

 

 

I do hope we go there soon. As you know my heart is in the Black Sea but this would be a perfect expansion, and the Allied aircraft involved would pave way to the MTO-1943 scenario many are wishing for.

Yeah, thats what I figured as well. Practically if only Devs gave the tools to make the maps once could have Tobruk, Sicily, Malta and every other place in Med without problem since half the aircraft would already be in game.  

Edited by =LD=Hiromachi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

100% support this, love the lineup of planes and it would be great to see this part of the war represented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A-36A was present indeed but not more than one unit used it and it was replaced by the end of 1944. Besides, there is already P-51A. Cool aircraft but we just cant have everything.

And same for Ki-44. It was present, few were given to 64th Sentai and Yasuhiko Kuroe mastered it but the only actually unit fully equipped with them was 87th Sentai, which moved to Burma in May 1944 and suffered very heavy losses leading to immediate pull out. There are some choices and some sacrifices have to be made.

 

Yep, but both are rare in games and interesting. Both were on CBI, unlike 190th in Stalingrad.

I think that there is no need to argue, because I'm afraid that the next game will be again Eastern front. :\

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted for the second option.  However, I really like this presentation and I'd go for this as soon as my other choice - which would be Sicily/ Italy - so you've sold me on it.  One thing though; the Vultee?  Hmmm.....I can see where you're coming from but surely the Beaufighter would be a better choice for the overall series?

 

I must confess I'm really enjoying the twin engine stuff too :salute:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I had a hard time thinking on the attackers / dive bombers. In case of Navy (either Japanese or US) choice would be super easy - D4Y, SBD, D3A, SB2C. But here it wasn't so easy. Still I figured Vultee to be a very unique design and not present on any other front. It was delivered on direct request for close support aircraft and it did its job. Beaufighter on contrary served pretty much on every front British/Australian/New Zealand pilots flew - Mediterranean, SWPA and could be added in any of those potential expansions. 

Besides, Vengeance has its own beauty :

 

 

But true. It lacks that 2nd engine  :lol:

Edited by =LD=Hiromachi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too agree on the Vengeance being the better decision for this setup (not only because the Beaufighter wins the price of outstanding ugliness for me).

 

The Ki-51 is a very lightweight ive bomber with small payload (250kg max.) and weak armarment. Opposing it with sth like the well armoured and heavily armed Beaufighter which surpasses it in nearly every aspect would just be plain wrong and create disbalance. The Vengeance, while still superiour to the Ki-51 in many aspects, is a lot closer to be a fair contender. It still has twice the bombload and better armarment, but is also twice as heavy. Performence wise both are suprisingly similar.

 

The Beaufighter probably could have it's debout in naval battles with the role of being a British torpedo bomber, which personally I would find way more interesting than ground attacking.

 

Anywaym nice writeup Hiromachi. Not as exiting as taking off from a carrier in a SB2C or D4Y for me but still an interesting and refreshing theatre to look forward to,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How common was the ki 45 in Burma? Maybe that could be a contemporary to the Beaufighter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They were certainly present there. But not in the given timeframe. 21st Sentai flying Nicks was stationed since March 1943 but was withdrawn in January 1944 to increase the protection of oilfields in East Indies. Besides, Ki-45 is not exactly playing the same role as Beaufighter. It was at that time a dedicated bomber hunter / night fighter. Either with a 20 mm cannon and two 12.7mm machine cannons or 37 mm cannon it was scrambled most of the time to deal with B-24s. It could carry up to 500 kg of bombs (2 x 250 kg) which is more than Bristol Beaufighter but ... latter one also carried rockets and its main armament was more than enough to deal with any ground targets (excluding heavy tanks). 

It's another option for sure though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 for this interesting and imaginative concept: just for interest, some books worth reading

 

Air War for Burma: The Allies Fight Back 1942-1945

 

177 Beaufighter Squadron in Burma

 

Beaufighters Over Burma: 27 Sqn.

 

Mowhawks Over Burma

 

Ki-43 Aces of WW 2

 

Japanese Army Air Force Fighter Units and Their Aces

 

Making a case for featuring the Mitsubishi Ki-46 in this theatre as well: consider the challenge of flying an unarmed reconnaissance aircraft over enemy territory, accurately photographing the specified target and getting back home.

 

Mitsubishi Ki-46

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surprisingly enough I fully support this idea as a future contender and I just freggin LOVE the Ki-43, it's probably the most beautiful fighter in WWII.

But not before a Kuban/Krimea/Mediteraneaeaeaeaen Installmen (2 maps, similar aircraft, Hurricanes and Spits and P-40s for Allied Side reduce Workload for Burma as well). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, Ki-46 could certainly exist as Ai aircraft. But if I recall Han said in case of current BoM/BoS machines that Ai reconnaissance is not considered for any close future. 

Ki-46 was also used a mobile command post. I believe in early 1942 gen. Kenji Yamamoto was commanding the ground and air units from it, during those operations against British and AVG. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice idea. I'm very impressed with the anount of detail. I voted a full yes! (And i'm actually a luftwaffe guy).

 

Only thing is that i would rather see a p38 then the mustang. And one question. Can we reuse the p40 from BOM?

 

Grt M

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's up to mission designer what kind of aircraft he would like to include. I see no reason to exclude P-40. Though E model was by that time replaced by N, which was a bit faster but most importantly due to higher boost ratings and lower gross weight it could finally climb. So P-40 E would be more a ground attacker (which is not bad at all, thats how I use it in BoM/BoS anyway) or bomber hunter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the match-up as you laid out works best, Hiromachi :)

 

These are after all the most representative aircraft of the period. The Beaufighter (which I find rather pleasant, aesthetically) would probably come handy later, as mentioned, but it is best used to its full potential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

An excellent write up.

 

Personally I'd go with Papua/New Guinea.

 

von Tom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any scenery which does not include Bf 109 suits me :) For prems, I will stick with P-38 & Ki-45 pair or A-36 & Ki-44.

Edited by Tesarus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What category you consider for elephants? Heavy duty truck or infantry close support tank? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just throw that in for completeness:

Thats what I call a free advertisement  :lol:  

 

 

What category you consider for elephants? Heavy duty truck or infantry close support tank? :D

A heavy cavalry. You've seen tanks rushing airfields in BoS, beware of elephants in  BoB.

qKs5Qv.jpg

From : http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=65&t=208368

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love the idea  :)

 

My only concern is that a 'Far Eastern' expansions as a standalone is fine, but for the benefit of the BoS/BoM/Bo? 'universe there needs to be a slightly homogeneous feature to the paneset, maximising the 'backwards compatibility' to use some in other theaters even yet unreleased, I.E. tying in with Western Desert/Med/WEurope and Eastern front and the Aircraft available now and in future.

 

Just as a single (and probably not great) example (and I would still love a Spitfire Mk VIII) the Spitfdire Mk V saw use in the far East, Med and Russian front, a slightly earlier Japanese planeset would also give easier opportunities to expand on while also providing more allied aircraft that can also tie in with other theaters.

 

obviously some aircraft will always be marginalised by really only appearing in a specific area and time historically, and this cannot be helped, but making this happen as little as possible would be better, given the complexity of creating new aircraft compared to previous Gen sims, while also taking note of iconic aircraft that need to be present for casual/commercial interest/realities

 

Please don't take this as criticism, it is only thoughts  ;)

 

@ Dr Zeebra, nice vid

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Edited by Dakpilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love the idea  :)

 

My only concern is that a 'Far Eastern' expansions as a standalone is fine, but for the benefit of the BoS/BoM/Bo? 'universe there needs to be a slightly homogeneous feature to the paneset, maximising the 'backwards compatibility' to use some in other theaters even yet unreleased, I.E. tying in with Western Desert/Med/WEurope and Eastern front and the Aircraft available now and in future.

 

Just as a single (and probably not great) example (and I would still love a Spitfire Mk VIII) the Spitfdire Mk V saw use in the far East, Med and Russian front, a slightly earlier Japanese planeset would also give easier opportunities to expand on while also providing more allied aircraft that can also tie in with other theaters.

 

obviously some aircraft will always be marginalised by really only appearing in a specific area and time historically, and this cannot be helped, but making this happen as little as possible would be better, given the complexity of creating new aircraft compared to previous Gen sims, while also taking note of iconic aircraft that need to be present for casual/commercial interest/realities

 

Please don't take this as criticism, it is only thoughts  ;)

 

@ Dr Zeebra, nice vid

 

Cheers Dakpilot

And that's why it should follow

There are several Russian theatres to build up to purely allied theatres. 

 

Before Getting to the Med:

Kuban for Spitfires and P-39, later P-40s etc as well as mechanics for Torpedoes and Closely fought Ground Battles, so basically a combined Crimea and Kuban Map late 43

Hurricanes and A-20s saw service in the Baltic and most likely near Leningrad, which would probably some Finnish Aircraft as well, like Blenheims and Brewster Buffaloes for which saw service in Burma as well. 

For me these two Theatres are the backbone for the Med and Burma and provide excellent backbones for even more.

 

Many people in these Forum Sections are not practical people, they don't think in ways to reduce workload and get more for less. They just see what they want and they want it quickly and don't care for the work behind it, it's sad but true. 

Il-2 is so great because the Devs put a ton of research into the maps and aircraft, the Flight Models are Amazing, probably the best for the consumer market out there and that needs time, effort and money, and even more the further away the theatre is from their HQ.

If you argue sensibly people either don't hear you at all or insult you. 

 

Of course I would like to see Burma at SOME POINT, blow up some Elephant Convois with my 4-cannon Spit Mk.Vc and watch gore and blood happen. 

But I know that we won't get it in the near future for Prices Non-Westerners can somewhat afford as well.

 

The reason I own and drive a GM/Fiat Car is backwards compatibility, it makes parts cheap and easy to find. I can reuse parts from about 50 different widely sold models that sell in the entire world. 

Try finding a VW TDi Camshaft in Australian Scrapyards, or a special BMW 316 radiator hose in America below 50$, while I drive through with a smile because my parts will even be in China.

 

It's a bit of a weird analogy, but I hope you get the point I'm getting at. There are stupid people that want maybe good things without thinking them through first and establishing a large base to build on. 

Edited by 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps a P-38 would be a more authentic choice for combating the the Japanese... I can also imagine the Developers wanting to make the P-38 as a challenge rather than chore. As it would also be an achievement to make a flight model of the P-38 at the same professional level as their other module, since no developer has ever bothered modeling a P-38 at a such a complex level.

...But I'd love to see a Thunderbolt II(P-47D-25), 8 .50 cals in Il2 BoS's game engine would be godly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a good idea : I love this theater under Il2 (and Czechtexan made beautifull campaigns)

there are plenty of good ideas, but now, we mare waiting for 1C to decide, or better said to tell us what they decided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love the idea  :)

 

My only concern is that a 'Far Eastern' expansions as a standalone is fine, but for the benefit of the BoS/BoM/Bo? 'universe there needs to be a slightly homogeneous feature to the paneset, maximising the 'backwards compatibility' to use some in other theaters even yet unreleased, I.E. tying in with Western Desert/Med/WEurope and Eastern front and the Aircraft available now and in future.

 

Just as a single (and probably not great) example (and I would still love a Spitfire Mk VIII) the Spitfdire Mk V saw use in the far East, Med and Russian front, a slightly earlier Japanese planeset would also give easier opportunities to expand on while also providing more allied aircraft that can also tie in with other theaters.

 

obviously some aircraft will always be marginalised by really only appearing in a specific area and time historically, and this cannot be helped, but making this happen as little as possible would be better, given the complexity of creating new aircraft compared to previous Gen sims, while also taking note of iconic aircraft that need to be present for casual/commercial interest/realities

 

Please don't take this as criticism, it is only thoughts  ;)

 

@ Dr Zeebra, nice vid

 

Cheers Dakpilot

No worries, I'm open to any criticism. I dont have problem with reconsidering some elements though I put an effort to put the things together so I'm going to defend my choices nevertheless  ;)

 

I can see the point in continuation idea, but that doesnt really apply to Pacific. It's so different, that even for the same aircraft that were used in various theaters the results could be very different. Mentioned Spitfire V did moderately well in Mediterranean theater but its introduction in SWPA for defense of Darwin ended in a great losses suffered, even though the raids over northern Australia were prevented. 

So at some point there would have to happen a switch that would cut a direct relation. 

 

But even the plane-set I've presented is quite related to the events in other theaters, just look at Hurricane II - that machine saw service from Britain in 1940, through Russia in 1941-1942 up to Burma 1942-1944 period. Not to mention that Hurricane was a choice in last year voting for premium aircraft, competing with P-40 E. So this way same Hurricane could be brought into life and serve in three different planesets. 

B-25 was pretty much most common American medium bomber, seeing service in every front - even in Russia : http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/akvilyanov/ some of the B-25s were used up to Manchurian operation 1945. 

 

Spitfire VIII or P-51A were present in operations in North Africa and Italy, participating in fights in Tunisia, operation Husky, Allied landing at Salerno, landing in southern France ... considering that there is a strong group supporting the expansions taking place in Italy and Northern Africa again such choice is perspective. 

 

Only unique aircraft that cant be fitted anywhere else is Vultee Vengenace. But thats exactly why I thought it was an interesting addition, for its uniqueness. 

 

The idea to make a step back to 1943 is reasonable but also would be very limiting. Front in Burma was a lot more steady in 1943, Chindit operations and offensive in Arakan area were not nearly as intensive as Imphal, Kohima, siege of Myitkyina and following allied offensives bringing Allies to Irrawady river. That also completely omits the Air bridge. At the end its not only about the aircraft but a campaign that involves all kinds of forces and allows to create interesting scenarios. As such, 1943 was not a crucial year. 

Afaik, Spitfire V indeed saw service in India and Burma but in pure numbers its presence was marginal if compared to Spitfire VIII. Dominant fighter in 1943 was Hurricane, No. 155 Squadron used Mohawks and else US 10th Air Force had P-40s (state for 1st June 1943), P-51A (and P-38) arrived at the similar period as Spitfire Vc and for December 1943 there were still only three squadrons flying those as at that time already two squadrons were training in Spitfire VIIIs (No. 81 and No. 152. 

 

 

 

Before Getting to the Med: Kuban for Spitfires and P-39, later P-40s etc as well as mechanics for Torpedoes and Closely fought Ground Battles, so basically a combined Crimea and Kuban Map late 43 Hurricanes and A-20s saw service in the Baltic and most likely near Leningrad, which would probably some Finnish Aircraft as well, like Blenheims and Brewster Buffaloes for which saw service in Burma as well.  For me these two Theatres are the backbone for the Med and Burma and provide excellent backbones for even more.

That logic is faulty, if all those aircraft would already be in game what would be the reason to buy next expansion ? For desert map with some similar aircraft as most iconic were already taken ? Original Il-2s did not have to be related one to the other.

 

 

 

Many people in these Forum Sections are not practical people, they don't think in ways to reduce workload and get more for less. They just see what they want and they want it quickly and don't care for the work behind it, it's sad but true.  Il-2 is so great because the Devs put a ton of research into the maps and aircraft, the Flight Models are Amazing, probably the best for the consumer market out there and that needs time, effort and money, and even more the further away the theatre is from their HQ.
 

Truth is that neither you or me know exact amount of work required to develop any further expansion. Considering all the tools are developed and team gained experience its really no great difference if step to a new theater would be made. It will have to be made anyway at some point and new things would have to be developed anyway. 

 

 

 

Perhaps a P-38 would be a more authentic choice for combating the the Japanese... I can also imagine the Developers wanting to make the P-38 as a challenge rather than chore. As it would also be an achievement to make a flight model of the P-38 at the same professional level as their other module, since no developer has ever bothered modeling a P-38 at a such a complex level. ...But I'd love to see a Thunderbolt II(P-47D-25), 8 .50 cals in Il2 BoS's game engine would be godly.

 

That was a little bit of my bias tbh, I just really like P-51. And since Allison one has never received a proper introduction to the sim world I thought its a great opportunity. While P-38 and P-47 are great possibilities as well it is known already that we wont see any 4-engine bombers any time soon so high altitude aircraft like those make less sense than Allison Mustang which performs best at around 11,000 feet :salute:  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly I'd rather have the p-38 over the p-51 any day of the week, even if it was barely there, especially if its the p-38j and the p-51a thats in competition!!! XD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, aside the fact the P-51A also is a personal of mine (and I never really had sth for the P-38), it also fits somewhat bette into the planeset in my opinion. Remember the P-38 had great ordinance and could deliver deadly strikes both to the ground as well as the air while the Japanese opponent - the Hayate - is merely equiped with small bombs (don't know if they really flew many Jabo sorties with it).

 

There're also plenty of options for any P-38 variant to slip in at some point as it was a well represented aircraft both in the more popular pacific theatres as well as over Europe during the later war stages. The P-51A however did merely see action in the PTO and Afrika and is more of a side player compared to other fighter aircraft in service at the time. Since this is intentionally a side theatre feauturing side aircraft (Ki-51, Vengeance) the P-51A fits the overall scheme better than the well known P-38.

 

Apart from the Hayate, which I'm still a little sceptical about (yet I do see Hiromachis point and can't think of a better solution atm), the planeset is overall fine to me, although I'd expect most of the players to shift towars allies because of their (overall) more capeable aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And that's why it should follow

There are several Russian theatres to build up to purely allied theatres. 

 

Before Getting to the Med:

Kuban for Spitfires and P-39, later P-40s etc as well as mechanics for Torpedoes and Closely fought Ground Battles, so basically a combined Crimea and Kuban Map late 43

Hurricanes and A-20s saw service in the Baltic and most likely near Leningrad, which would probably some Finnish Aircraft as well, like Blenheims and Brewster Buffaloes for which saw service in Burma as well. 

For me these two Theatres are the backbone for the Med and Burma and provide excellent backbones for even more.

 

Many people in these Forum Sections are not practical people, they don't think in ways to reduce workload and get more for less. They just see what they want and they want it quickly and don't care for the work behind it, it's sad but true. 

Il-2 is so great because the Devs put a ton of research into the maps and aircraft, the Flight Models are Amazing, probably the best for the consumer market out there and that needs time, effort and money, and even more the further away the theatre is from their HQ.

If you argue sensibly people either don't hear you at all or insult you. 

 

Of course I would like to see Burma at SOME POINT, blow up some Elephant Convois with my 4-cannon Spit Mk.Vc and watch gore and blood happen. 

But I know that we won't get it in the near future for Prices Non-Westerners can somewhat afford as well.

 

The reason I own and drive a GM/Fiat Car is backwards compatibility, it makes parts cheap and easy to find. I can reuse parts from about 50 different widely sold models that sell in the entire world. 

Try finding a VW TDi Camshaft in Australian Scrapyards, or a special BMW 316 radiator hose in America below 50$, while I drive through with a smile because my parts will even be in China.

 

It's a bit of a weird analogy, but I hope you get the point I'm getting at. There are stupid people that want maybe good things without thinking them through first and establishing a large base to build on. 

 

Pretty much what I think. 

 

What is being proposed here is kind of a dead end in a way. Definitely wouldn't want 777 to go that route and they probably won't. Many other possibilities that would be easier, cheaper, at least as interesting and fit their workflow better.

 

Just my 2c.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Original Il-2s did not have to be related one to the other.

Let's be honest, it's because the old Il-2s quite frankly were S***. The Flight and Visual Models were Primitve including CloD, the Maps were Simple and the Graphics horrible.

These games could easily and cheaply put out large quantities of maps and aircraft, the current one can't. 

This game is faaar more complex, the flight model probably the most sophisticated open to the consumer market. Just look at the people complaining about "wobbling" aircraft because they are used to flight models in which the aircraft were on virtual rails. 

This is why backwards compatibility is important. 

Edited by 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann
Profanity...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is being proposed here is kind of a dead end in a way. Definitely wouldn't want 777 to go that route and they probably won't. Many other possibilities that would be easier, cheaper, at least as interesting and fit their workflow better. Just my 2c.

It would be nice if you'd turn that into 5c and actually explain. Because I dont see how is this a dead end. By the theater it can easily be moved back for any next expansion to 1941/1942 Malay operations, it is directly related to events in China (the fights for Burma road). Neither are the aircraft a dead end. Either allied (P-51, Spitfire VIII, B-25, Hurricane) can be taken to quite a few other theaters (North Africa, Eastern Front) or Japanese (Ki-43, Ki-84, Zero, Ki-48 or Ki-51 easily fit into Marianas, Philippines, Okinawa, China operations). 

 

Neither I see anything making this so expensive. If Dev team can build a massive city like Moscow (which was in detail presented today) what would make it so much more expensive ? Mountains ? Jungle ? 

As far as I remember, Caucasus which is often proposed is also not a flat area ...

 

Let's be honest, it's because the old Il-2s quite frankly were [Edited]. The Flight and Visual Models were Primitve including CloD, the Maps were Simple and the Graphics horrible.

No they were not. At their time they were very good and ahead of any competition. They also gave a great modding possibilities virtually becoming playable even a decade after release. By our current standards they were primitive, but thats not the way you should judge them. 

 

These games could easily and cheaply put out large quantities of maps and aircraft, the current one can't. 

If the mentioned by you CloD would be so easy and cheap then they would actually finish it easily, which they didn't.

 

This game is faaar more complex, the flight model probably the most sophisticated open to the consumer market. Just look at the people complaining about "wobbling" aircraft because they are used to flight models in which the aircraft were on virtual rails.  This is why backwards compatibility is important. 

So thats a reasoning to hide into pocket expectations and look for products with minimalist approach  ?

 

Take a look at Ru forums and discussions there, they discuss with BlackSix by no means easy and cheap options. There is Kurks which is massive and would involve great deal of assets to be created, there is Tunisia which would be as new as Burma and there is talk over my proposition of Burma (with some additions like Sicily, Murmansk, El Alamein, etc).

 

Anyway, here is a Japanese documentary of Imphal operations :

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRWYIhPMlBQ&feature=youtu.be

Edited by Bearcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's be honest, it's because the old Il-2s quite frankly were [Edited]. The Flight and Visual Models were Primitve including CloD, the Maps were Simple and the Graphics horrible.

These games could easily and cheaply put out large quantities of maps and aircraft, the current one can't. 

This game is faaar more complex, the flight model probably the most sophisticated open to the consumer market. Just look at the people complaining about "wobbling" aircraft because they are used to flight models in which the aircraft were on virtual rails. 

This is why backwards compatibility is important. 

 

I totally disagree with this.. for a while there IL2 was the best WWII simulator on the market with no competition and there is still an argument to be made even at this late date that pound for poiund it is still the greatest flight sim ever made when you factor in the whole mod thing..

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...