Game version 2.001 discussion: Battle of Moscow

[SYN_Mike77]

If you have played RoF for a long enough time you know that the out of the box "career"  was no where near as in depth or as immersive as what we now have with BoS/BoM.  A couple of years after release they put out the "Beta" career.  Much (all?, most?) of that campaign was done by dedicated users.  The mini careers were all done by users.  Of course PWCG was done by a hyper dedicated user.  

 

One of the things about playing this game through the server is that the devs know exactly how people are using their product.  What they have found in RoF is that PWCG is multiple times more popular than the Beta career.  Careers take many, many man hours to develop and every one of those hours has to be paid for by the devs if the career is done in house.  Then Pat does his thing and everyone uses it instead.  Why would the devs spend the money that their own stats tell them almost no one uses?  I'd rather that time and money go into new planes, new maps new features and FM development.  

[Geralt]

thanks for the big feedback on my point. I understand your arguments too. Especially what Sharpe XB wrote but also the other ones. Still I find this unlocking System and the campaigns crap.

The ones In ROF were much better. If I fail in a 45 minutes Mission, I´m willing to fly it again, I`m not the typical "Call of Duty" quickshooter but anyway, the devs will do as they like no matter what I write, I know. ...

[Trooper117]

 Why would the devs spend the money that their own stats tell them almost no one uses?  I'd rather that time and money go into new planes, new maps new features and FM development.  

 

 

 

 

Did the dev's know that Pat was going to dive in and put in his PWCG?.... that prospect was not an option at the start.

 

Plus your comments are great if you are into MP gameplay... there are many more people play offline and expected a stellar SP campaign from the start.

 

And yes, I use PWCG, but that should not be a green light to pay lip service to sorting out a good dev built campaign system. Plus, think about the people out there that do not like adding extras into their game system as they don't have the confidence to mess with files etc...

[Geralt]

 

 

 

Did the dev's know that Pat was going to dive in and put in his PWCG?.... that prospect was not an option at the start.

 

Plus your comments are great if you are into MP gameplay... there are many more people play offline and expected a stellar SP campaign from the start.

 

And yes, I use PWCG, but that should not be a green light to pay lip service to sorting out a good dev built campaign system. Plus, think about the people out there that do not like adding extras into their game system as they don't have the confidence to mess with files etc...

 

good that you mention this ! I have the beta3 version of PWCG installed and my game is registered on steam. If I want to update to version 1.2.1 of the campaign genarator, how do I do this ? There is no readme just an exefile that you have to klick. I dont know what it will do when I klick on it, Will it automatically overwrite my old files ? Dont dare to install it, scared to !!!!! up something in the game. Does the new version cover both, BoM and BoS scenario ?

Edited May 25, 2016 by BlackSix

[LukeFF]

 

 

But never mind, I didnt intend to insult anyone

 

...and yet you asked if someone was being paid for expressing their opinion on the campaign.   

[Trooper117]

 I have the beta3 version of PWCG installed and my game is registered on steam. If I want to update to version 1.2.1 of the campaign genarator, how do I do this ? There is no readme just an exefile that you have to klick. I dont know what it will do when I klick on it, Will it automaticalli overwrite my old files ? Dont dare to install it, scared to f...ck up something in the game.

 

 

I don't have a STEAM version of the game, so I can't really help you on that score... I'm not sure if the file structure is the same as my version... 

[Geralt]

...and yet you asked if someone was being paid for expressing their opinion on the campaign.   

yes because the praise of the sim smelled downright of getting paid for his opinion about it.

I don't have a STEAM version of the game, so I can't really help you on that score... I'm not sure if the file structure is the same as my version... 

ok, thanks for your answer.

[TheBlackPenguin]

I've given my view of the campaign in a separate thread, but in essence I found completing a mission flying an intercept P40 mission in BOM significantly harder than flying an attack mission with the Il2 in BOS, biggest issue and I think it was highlighted to me with the P40 (it can happen with any plane, but as the P-40 is more challenging the issue is more likely in this plane imho) is how campaign handles the user missing the intercept/failing mission by missing the target, literally it seems to enter a 'limbo' where it is pointless to even continue any further. Honestly just adding a secondary mission via radio and so look for targets of opportunity, or calling it quits by requesting a return to base (that way the waypoints can redirect to the exits) and then having the ability to at least gain some points for bringing the plane back to base in one piece (or exit via the exit waypoint). The points don't have to be a lot, but anything would be better than nothing.

[Dakpilot]

Looked at from the pure 'cynical' perspective of the end user the "Campaign" could easily be judged as unsatisfactory, as an advanced quick mission generator (as the Dev's described it) I find it very good

 

However the situation and history of the genre at the time have to be considered, the recent (niche) Industry shaking multimillion $ loss of CLoD had a big impact on what was going to be funded and how, the fact that there is even any BoS/BoM to me, seems a small miracle

 

Although 1C is a large company the Flight sim team (1CGS/777) is a very small one, and probably not the most popular section due to reasons above, there is no question that the time allotted and budget were extremely small for production of BoS, they already proved that beta career for RoF was not really with budget/time a viable proposition

 

everyone would wish for a Falcon 4 type dynamic campaign, but it pretty much finished that dev team, there is no way in this current business climate something like that would be funded again

 

sometimes I don't think people give enough credit for what we actually have now, or enough consideration for the harsh realities of current economic climate/business situation

 

Obviously as a buyer plonking down a seemingly considerable amount of money down for a flight sim these factors are irrelevant, but a moment of thought should be given to the realities seen from the other side

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Yes, I sometimes think we lose perspective on what is involved on the cost/benefit spectrum from a business standpoint. This is probably a good place to say Thank You to the Devs for what they have delivered so far.

[SharpeXB]

Indeed I think we are fortunate that these flight sim games are as sophisticated as they are. Because much of that goes unnoticed or unused by the typical player. A graph like this (hours of playtime on BoS) explains much of why a campaign would be structured the way it is. The number of players who spend hundreds of hours playing a career mode type game (which would include me) are very few. I would like to imagine flight sim players are different than most because the game requires such a learning curve and hardware investment, you would like to imagine the typical player putting in many more hours compared to other games. But in reality the statistics do look just like every other game, the high-hour players are a very small %

Edited May 23, 2016 by SharpeXB

[LLv24_Zami]

good that you mention this ! I have the beta3 version of PWCG installed and my game is registered on steam. If I want to update to version 1.2.1 of the campaign genarator, how do I do this ? There is no readme just an exefile that you have to klick. I dont know what it will do when I klick on it, Will it automatically overwrite my old files ? Dont dare to install it, scared to f...ck up something in the game. Does the new version cover both, BoM and BoS scenario ?

I don`t think there is anything special with steam. Probably best to do delete beta folder and do fresh install of PWCG. There has been many versions after beta 3.

[Trooper117]

If the campaign was not really a 'viable proposition' it should not have been named a 'campaign'... if it was simply named as a 'mission generator' there may not have been so much gnashing of teeth from old IL2 dinosaurs like myself, lol!

 

Keeping with the 'naming' theme, I think I remember even Jason stating that they should not have called the game or named it after 'IL2', as lets be honest, that just conjurs up for people like me, the image of a much improved version of what went before.

If they had named their own flight sim dynasty, without reference to the old IL2, then I'm sure a lot of the attitudes to the game may have been different...

[Dakpilot]

The budget came from 1C which owned IL-2 name and known franchise, there is no way it made financial sense to call it anything else, without that name BoS would have not existed

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[seafireliv]

The budget came from 1C which owned IL-2 name and known franchise, there is no way it made financial sense to call it anything else, without that name BoS would have not existed

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Disagree. All it would take a is a little more smarter marketting.

 

In fact, the original IL2 might have done better if it hadn`t have called itself that  as the term `IL2 and Sturmovik` were alien words to most of us in the West at the time. It`s true that the IL2 moniker is recognised now, but it is still alien to many today. Something like the `Great Russian Air Conflicts of WW2` with a picture of a 109 and Lagg 3 in a dogfight would probably have drawn greater crowds then and today.

 

I still believe it`s a mistake to call it `IL2 sturmovik` even now, at least in the West. Most people I talk to would have no idea what that was even now.

Edited May 23, 2016 by seafireliv

[Brano]

@seafireliv

You should watch interview with Oleg about history of this franchise. It is available on Utube and was also advertised several times on this forum. It will bring some light to your dark thoughts

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Fred: Obviously the aircraft featured in the IL-2 series, and their various flight models / damage models / cockpits / instruments kept people engaged for years. In the early days, there was huge debate about your decision to focus so much work on little known aircraft from the Eastern Front. What do you think of that debate now?

 

Oleg: We are very proud of the work we did. I believe that it was due to IL-2 that so many people are now aware of the Eastern Front, that so many other developers are doing it, and that people in the West no longer think of the Russians as the mindless horde that defeated the Germans with nothing but endless human waves.

 

We are very proud of Russian contribution to WWII and of Russian fighting machines. Bringing them to the audiences that never heard of them before was a wonderful thing to do.

From the SimHQ retrospective, 2013.

[Aap]

It`s true that the IL2 moniker is recognised now, but it is still alien to many today. Something like the `Great Russian Air Conflicts of WW2` with a picture of a 109 and Lagg 3 in a dogfight would probably have drawn greater crowds

I don't think so. Now "IL-2 Sturmovik" is a known brand name for long term WWII aviation simmers - target audience for this game. And for the new people - if there is something they have heard about Eastern Front, it is Battle of Stalingrad.

"Great Russian Air Conflicts" without the IL2 brand could have been mixed with all the war-thunders and world-of-warplanes out there.

[SOLIDKREATE]

I'm just sitting here waiting for "IL-10 STURMOVIK: BATTLE OF BERLIN".

[Jason_Williams]

Guys,

 

Stay on topic which is version 2.01 and Battle of Moscow please. Otherwise, I'll start deleting posts.

 

Litigate the past elsewhere.

 

Thanks, 

 

Jason

[Sokol1]

- Typical campaigns involve scripted action which makes repeated missions even more tedious. In BoS/BoM the missions are different every time you play.

 

When I was "playing for unlocks" - as my BoS version is the "peasant" - the missions in campaign are already the same, just vary the place or time of the day...

[SharpeXB]

When I was "playing for unlocks" - as my BoS version is the "peasant" - the missions in campaign are already the same, just vary the place or time of the day...

But in the BoS and BoM Campaigns what happens in the mission is different every time. Even if the description "Airfield Attack" is the same, the action you encounter is always varied. In the typical static scripted campaign, when you repeat a mission exactly the same things happen over and over again on cue. It makes having to repeat them really boring. And if you don't have time to finish and hour long session that's what you're faced with. Honestly that type of campaign is really awful. No other game genre makes you play hour long missions without saving your progress. Edited May 23, 2016 by SharpeXB

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

I thought it was just my impression, but it seems the AI has gotten wiser recently.

 

Here is a screenshot from my last campaign mission (accidentally ruined the resolution while resaving, ignore that please):

 

 

My trusty wingman in his MiG-3 stuck to me without needing any additional command. We blew past this massive group of aircraft (four German, three Soviet) en route to an interception. That felt nice. The ground control and wingman did not communicate the position of the bomber flight I was intercepting until it was in sight, and this happened yesterday when I played a low level intercept as well. In fact, I saw the three Ju-88s before getting the radio call, and if I remember correctly the wingman did not engage until I told him to.

 

It's much more exciting to enter the target area and be looking around like mad since you don't know where the enemy is coming from. Good job, 1CGS!

 

(By the way, Eagle flight dispatched three Bf-109s within a minute, I don't know what happened to the fourth but I assume the coward ran home.)

[mort]

I noticed that too but I've only played the static missions since release so I figured things were just better in the handcrafted ones.

[Albino]

A quick note of appreciation for the latest patch. In particular the scripted Campaign missions are wonderful. Cheers to the devs for positioning the player as wingman rather than flight leader. Performance is solid too! I know the new Techno-Chat features are controversial with more experienced players, however as a casual 'normal' player, I appreciate the help. Particularly the reminders regarding optimal approach and landing speeds across different aircraft. My landings have instantly improved.

 

With all the improvements since BOS, I'm eager to see how the public rates BOM on Steam!

 

A quick aside. Flying the Mig-3 on intercept against Ju-88s yesterday, I managed to down one from 700m by sitting on his tail and using the 'zoom' function to fire quick bursts. IRL, is this a realistic engagement distance? It felt like cheating.

 

Regards

Albino

[Geralt]

... by the way, besides the fact, that the unlocksystem is crap, what about droptanks ? The BF-109 E7 that`s in the game now was the first variant of the 109 that had the capacity to carry droptanks. That should be added for all planes in the game that had it in reality too. I know, noone will fly so long, that they would need a droptank. But maybe that should be considered if the developers should ever intend one day to create a western front channel scenario. Or maybe a mediterranean scenario where you could fly escort from Sizily to the coast of Africa ... well I can imagine that may perhaps happen in 10 years. The eastern front was big enough from Murmansk down to Noworossijsk to create many new maps in future without the necessity to go west or south right ?

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Drop tanks and player-controlled fuel tanks will be added in the future, it's on the to-do list.

[Geralt]

Drop tanks and player-controlled fuel tanks will be added in the future, it's on the to-do list.

aha, ok - well then, let`s wait ...

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

Drop tanks and player-controlled fuel tanks will be added in the future, it's on the to-do list.

 

Careful there, Lucas... I don't think that's 100% true.

 

They said they'd be looking at remodeling the fuel system to provide for more user interaction (player-controlled, as you say) but I don't think I saw any specific information about the inclusion of drop tanks.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

I'm 90% sure it was in the package, I'll look through later today to confirm.

[=EXPEND=Capt_Yorkshire]

hi devs latest patch is all good on my end but i was wondering why we rarely see the moscow map on multiplayer?

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

hi devs latest patch is all good on my end but i was wondering why we rarely see the moscow map on multiplayer?

zg26 has it up 24/7, I guess WOL isn't going to put a mission up, until its officially released.

[Trooper117]

It's not released yet?

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

It's not released yet?

its released as early access. 

 

http://il2sturmovik.com/

[Trooper117]

Oh, I thought after the last update, that was it!

[SharpeXB]

According to the first page of this thread BoM is done. I think the web front page hasn't been updated. And BoM isn't on Steam yet though.

[sakai69]

S! All.

I have a question. What is the next project? I vote BOB. That´s an amazing history of WW2 with great planes and scenery.

[74_jim_nihilist]

Looked at from the pure 'cynical' perspective of the end user the "Campaign" could easily be judged as unsatisfactory, as an advanced quick mission generator (as the Dev's described it) I find it very good

 

However the situation and history of the genre at the time have to be considered, the recent (niche) Industry shaking multimillion $ loss of CLoD had a big impact on what was going to be funded and how, the fact that there is even any BoS/BoM to me, seems a small miracle

 

Although 1C is a large company the Flight sim team (1CGS/777) is a very small one, and probably not the most popular section due to reasons above, there is no question that the time allotted and budget were extremely small for production of BoS, they already proved that beta career for RoF was not really with budget/time a viable proposition

 

everyone would wish for a Falcon 4 type dynamic campaign, but it pretty much finished that dev team, there is no way in this current business climate something like that would be funded again

 

sometimes I don't think people give enough credit for what we actually have now, or enough consideration for the harsh realities of current economic climate/business situation

 

Obviously as a buyer plonking down a seemingly considerable amount of money down for a flight sim these factors are irrelevant, but a moment of thought should be given to the realities seen from the other side

 

Cheers Dakpilot

But what's with the old IL2 1946 Campaign generators? I am still playing the original IL2 and I really like em. I mean for sure, there could be more surprises, but the same goes for the missions from BOM/BOS. There is no Intercept Mission where my Flight gets intercepted. It is all really predictable and it doesn't feel like a war, where Situations occur suddenly. It's streamlined.

Edited May 24, 2016 by 74_jim_nihilist

[BlackSix]

S! All.

I have a question. What is the next project? I vote BOB. That´s an amazing history of WW2 with great planes and scenery.

We study several variants but we haven't made the final decision yet.

And we've no plans to do BOB, if you want that you can play CLOD right now.

 

According to the first page of this thread BoM is done. I think the web front page hasn't been updated. And BoM isn't on Steam yet though.

The work on Battle of Moscow project is done but BOM still remains in early access.

When the game is released on Steam that it will be the final release.

[Jade_Monkey]

We study several variants but we haven't made the final decision yet.

And we've no plans to do BOB, if you want that you can play CLOD right now.

Glad to hear that. Sensible approach imo.