What do you guys believe...

[JGr2/J5_W0LF-]

Well Gents

I never thought Id say this but I'm afraid that if the developers bring out any more maps that are more of the same thing and no planes then I may be going back to DCS. Yeah I know that DCS is a lot more expensive in the long run but they are developing a Normandy map and have the more exciting planes like the P-51, the Bf-109K and the FW-190D, not to mention the Jug is coming out along with the spit fire and other WWII based planes. Now don't get me wrong I love BOS/BOM but I need my WWII combat simming flights to have more of the older war era planes like the spitfire, tempests, P-51s and the P-47's just like the old IL2 1946 was. That's when this game for me will truly come full circle.

 

I also don't like all of the chat about cheaters and hackers that's buzzing around here, it makes me wonder why I even bother to play this game. Well like I said for me I really just hope that the developers really take into account what their players want to see and hopefully we will get an Africa or Italy map with much better plane set. For now Im off to fly in DCS for a while and Ill sit back here and see what comes out next....Salute Guys!

[Frequent_Flyer]

I think we will get stuck with another Eastern Front offering. In that case I would prefer the existing SP mode gets fixed rather than the same plane set over a different map.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Solutions? 

 

Edited June 1, 2016 by 55IAP_Lucas_From_Hell

[Frequent_Flyer]

If their " version " of the P-40 is any indication of their understanding of allied aircraft outside of their native land than , your suggestion is not a " solution " ?

 

However, if you through in a P-63, plus the PTO at least we would be looking at different scenery.

Edited June 1, 2016 by Frequent_Flyer

[Pharoah]

Well Gents

I never thought Id say this but I'm afraid that if the developers bring out any more maps that are more of the same thing and no planes then I may be going back to DCS. Yeah I know that DCS is a lot more expensive in the long run but they are developing a Normandy map and have the more exciting planes like the P-51, the Bf-109K and the FW-190D, not to mention the Jug is coming out along with the spit fire and other WWII based planes. Now don't get me wrong I love BOS/BOM but I need my WWII combat simming flights to have more of the older war era planes like the spitfire, tempests, P-51s and the P-47's just like the old IL2 1946 was. That's when this game for me will truly come full circle.

 

I also don't like all of the chat about cheaters and hackers that's buzzing around here, it makes me wonder why I even bother to play this game. Well like I said for me I really just hope that the developers really take into account what their players want to see and hopefully we will get an Africa or Italy map with much better plane set. For now Im off to fly in DCS for a while and Ill sit back here and see what comes out next....Salute Guys!

 

+1

[Gambit21]

DCS is a long way from providing an immersive WWII experience.

I'm watching...I own the Dora, but won't bother downloading and flying it until there's something to use it for besides

flying around Crimea or Las Vegas. Even when the Normandy map arrives, that's still a ways from a WWII campaign fleshed out

with B17's, ground objects, etc, etc. Going to be a while.

[novicebutdeadly]

I reckon Battle of the North Atlantic (include Norway)

That way we get ship targets, and maybe we can control the ships 

[TheElf]

I've never let my thoughts on this subject be a secret, but rather than launch into a long, rational, well thought out case for why I think what I think, I'll just say this...

 

If the Devs take the easy way out and just recycle the Yak/109/La/190/Stuka/110/Il-2/Pe-2/Heinkel models into an iteration of of BoS III where everything is 10% faster, 10% more heavily armed, and 10% different in all ways, pump out a couple relevant Eastern Front Maps and call it a new product...I'll vomit.

 

I love this game, but mark my words, failure to branch out into NEW territory will further hamper this franchise and disenfranchise the few players here already that aren't necessarily EF fanboys (of which I count myself).  More so than the abortive initial release, unlocks scandal, and all the other bad press they started with.  Not to mention they'll have completely missed a timely opportunity to expand the player base and reap the monetary rewards they deserve for producing the BEST COMBAT FLIGHT SIM on the market. 

 

ANY FRONT, in ANY part of the WORLD, with ANY planeset, especially if its early war and can be compatible in some way with what we have already would be a HUGE boon to the title, the Devs, and the Community.

 

Someone said it makes sense that another EF title would be best because the Devs are Russian and it would be easier for them to research it.  That is the dumbest things I've heard in my life.  These guys know WWII.  This game is WWII.  Dev nationality shouldn't be a strict limit on their ability to produce a sim.

 

Just my short thought...

[BlitzPig_EL]

If their " version " of the P-40 is any indication of their understanding of allied aircraft outside of their native land than , your suggestion is not a " solution " ?

 

However, if you through in a P-63, plus the PTO at least we would be looking at different scenery.

 

I agree.

 

BTW here is a photo of the engine limits placard in the cockpit of the P40 E on display at the National Museum of the United States Air Force, at Wright Field, Dayton Ohio.

 

 

Try using those numbers in the sim...

 

BTW, this aircraft was an export Kittyhawk sent to the RAF.

Edited June 1, 2016 by BlitzPig_EL

[LLv24_Zami]

Lately I have been leaning towards the idea that something else than EF might be the best choise. I mean for the game and it's future.

I like EF and it would be my choise but there can be more EF later.

 

Interesting times at least.

[TheElf]

Lately I have been leaning towards the idea that something else than EF might be the best choise. I mean for the game and it's future.

I like EF and it would be my choise but there can be more EF later.

 

Interesting times at least.

 

exactly....well said.

[ShamrockOneFive]

I agree.

 

BTW here is a photo of the engine limits placard in the cockpit of the P40 E on display at the National Museum of the United States Air Force, at Wright Field, Dayton Ohio.

 

 

Try using those numbers in the sim...

 

BTW, this aircraft was an export Kittyhawk sent to the RAF.

 

This is the kind of first hand research that I love. It's damn hard to dispute those numbers in my mind. I hope its incorporated in some future fixes.

[SAG]

I agree.

 

BTW here is a photo of the engine limits placard in the cockpit of the P40 E on display at the National Museum of the United States Air Force, at Wright Field, Dayton Ohio.

 

 

Try using those numbers in the sim...

 

BTW, this aircraft was an export Kittyhawk sent to the RAF.

 

please excuse my ignorance of the in-game p40 since i never fly it.

 

are those numbers higher? lower? or accuarate in BOM. and how much?  

 

thanks

[Feathered_IV]

Hmm.  That makes me think it would be rather cool to have little printed data plates like that for each aircraft with their operation ranges on.  Each in the style of the aircraft in question, perhaps in a little ring bound flip pad so you can prop it up in front of the monitor...

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

Afrika !!

[Dakpilot]

I agree.

 

BTW here is a photo of the engine limits placard in the cockpit of the P40 E on display at the National Museum of the United States Air Force, at Wright Field, Dayton Ohio.

 

 

Try using those numbers in the sim...

 

BTW, this aircraft was an export Kittyhawk sent to the RAF.

 

That aircraft is also fitted with 75" MP gauge as fitted to later P40E's it is not a direct comparison to the P40E we have in game fitted with the 50" MP Gauge

 

This particular aircraft was used by RCAF for the whole war and was rebuilt several times, then many times post war before going to Ohio Museum 

 

While I am NOT stating that the engine limits in BoS are perfect, this kind of 'evidence' is totally irrelevant to P40E used in Russia in 1942

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

America !!

[Guest deleted@50488]

@BlitzPig_EL

 

Made my simmer day today !

 

But, let me see if I correctly understood your post - it means what we have in BoM is actually very close to the real thing right ?

 

I never had problems with my P40E, other than being a lausy pilot, since I started observing these limits.

 

BTW, I also find it very good from a flight dynamics modeling PoV, specially reagarding the reported yaw instability that characterized the RW P40s.... And... I love the sounds too !

Edited June 1, 2016 by jcomm

[Picchio]

I would disagree there.  I think its no coincidence flight simulations saw their popularity go into decline during the years where the major developers dropped any immersive or narrative features in favour of a stripped down package of just aircraft and maps.

 

Thank you for your post.

I wish there were more people here who would really acknowledge this. Then maybe some of them could start rethinking how they design these games... sigh.

Edited June 1, 2016 by Picchio

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

If their " version " of the P-40 is any indication of their understanding of allied aircraft outside of their native land than , your suggestion is not a " solution " ?

The P-40 got 1941 manual limits because it depicts the 1941 version, much like the Bf-109G-2 got the restrictions in place in 1942. I'm pretty positive other aircraft will have slightly more liberal limits, as represented in their manuals in 1943. Either way the P-39 and Spitfire are much more capable than the P-40 in overall performance regardless of engine limits, so that won't be an issue either.

 

Also, their interpretation of the documents will be the same regardless of flying over hills by the Black Sea or fields in Burma.

[BlitzPig_EL]

So, just try in game to run the engine for 3 minutes at 2800rpm at 44.5". then  run it for a full five minutes at 3000rpm at 42" of manifold.

 

How many times it was rebuilt has nothing to do with the utterly incorrect way the P40 is modeled in the game.

 

And yeah, if the P39 is modeled to the same types of limits as the P40 in game then it's not going to be worth flying either, and if so, then just stay on the East Front, make your Russian customers happy, and kiss your western customers good bye.

 

Do you Commonwealth guys think that they will accurately model the Spit or Hurri, that have similar ways that T.O. and Emergency Power limits are handled?  Oh the gnashing of teeth and wails of supplication when the Hurricanes blow their Merlins all over the countrysides when using more than 2800 rpm for a short time...

[Asgar]

and? why should the P-40 be treated different than all the other planes in game? The 109 F-4 will break it's engine at 1.42ata after 1 minute even though there are countless reports of pilots using it much longer than that. the limits set in the manuals is what's used for the models in game. get over it

[Dakpilot]

So, just try in game to run the engine for 3 minutes at 2800rpm at 44.5". then  run it for a full five minutes at 3000rpm at 42" of manifold.

 

How many times it was rebuilt has nothing to do with the utterly incorrect way the P40 is modeled in the game.

 

And yeah, if the P39 is modeled to the same types of limits as the P40 in game then it's not going to be worth flying either, and if so, then just stay on the East Front, make your Russian customers happy, and kiss your western customers good bye.

 

Do you Commonwealth guys think that they will accurately model the Spit or Hurri, that have similar ways that T.O. and Emergency Power limits are handled?  Oh the gnashing of teeth and wails of supplication when the Hurricanes blow their Merlins all over the countrysides when using more than 2800 rpm for a short time...

 

Regardless of how the P-40E-1 in game is modelled a placard from a rebuilt (many times in it's life, and almost certainly to a later spec, evidenced by late model manifold gauge ) static display aircraft is no argument, a period placard from 1941/42 Russian used aircraft would be more revealing....

 

That is all the point I am making, that is what I believe, anyway P-40 FM/perfornmance discussions really belong elsewhere, so I am out of this one 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[BraveSirRobin]

Thank you for your post.

I wish there were more people here who would really acknowledge this. Then maybe some of them could start rethinking how they design these games... sigh.

If they start rethinking how they design these games based on popularity, we end up with War Thunder.

[Porkins]

Ye, I've been watching closely the discussions on ru forums and its sort of one-sided. Only something from the eastern theater of operations will satisfy those guys, which to be honest is a bit disappointing considering last two games already took place in Soviet Union. I've even seen that arguments of sort like: "what about the western community" were negated.

 

That's a shame. I think the devs need to make a business decision. Do they want to continue catering to a finite market in Russia, or do they want to grow their business? My impression is that customers in Europe and North America (and Asia if they market there) would be more interested in a Med or Pacific game. Europe and NA are much bigger markets than Russia. Personally, I have zero interest in a third game on the Eastern Front (I didn't buy Moscow because I wasn't interested enough in a 2nd one), but would preorder either Med or Pacific.

 

This isn't just about having a Western nation involved (although that's some of it, tbh). It is also about new environments and planes. A true sea component in this flight sim would be so exciting from a gameplay perspective. A Pacific campaign would present radically different planes from what was offered in BoS and BoM, and even a Med. campaign would give us different Allied planes and probably 1 or 2 new Axis planes. While I'd love to see the devs dive into the Pacific, it probably makes more sense to start with the Med (where the sea aspect wouldn't have to be so ambitious), and build towards a Pacific game. Kuban would also be interesting, but not so much as the THIRD game in a row set in Russia. Kuban would have been tremendous as the SECOND game in the new IL-2 series. I would have bought that.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Well the russian market only covers 17% of their customer base so any decision towards them in favour of the rest of their customers would not be well thought through. On the other hand theres quite a lot western guys wishing another eastern theatre expansion for completeness sake so they are more likely to go that road.

Also there's no doubt they have personal interests, which probaby will have more impact on their decision than the comunity has.

Edited June 1, 2016 by 6./ZG26_5tuka

[TheBlackPenguin]

I am glad I don't have to make the decision, whichever theater they choose someone is going to get upset and pram toys will be 'a flying' lol.

[LLv24_Zami]

I am glad I don't have to make the decision, whichever theater they choose someone is going to get upset and pram toys will be 'a flying' lol.

Yeah, sadly true.

 

It should be noted that they can`t make EF+MTO+PTO at the same time. So someone will be disappointed, hopefully they take it in mature way.

Edited June 1, 2016 by Zami

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

Well the russian market only covers 17% of theor customer base so any decision towards them in favour of the rest of their customers would not be well thought through. On the other side theres quite a lot western guys wishing another eastern theatre expansion for completeness so they are more likely to go that road.

 

Also there's no doubt they probably have personal interests, which probaby will have more impact on their decision than the comunity has.

 

I'll take Kuban, please. 

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Zami, but if they add some lend-lease aircraft and throw in a MTO map à la V. L. they hit off well with both markets, which is preferred.

[Feathered_IV]

It's probably just as well for 777 that the Russian market is just 17% of the customer base. They pay so much less for their copies of the game than we do and it would be hard to survive on them alone if it wasn't for other countries paying the triple-A prices.

[Dakpilot]

 

 

Someone said it makes sense that another EF title would be best because the Devs are Russian and it would be easier for them to research it.  That is the dumbest things I've heard in my life.  These guys know WWII.  This game is WWII.  Dev nationality shouldn't be a strict limit on their ability to produce a sim.

 

Just my short thought...

 

I assume that was meant for me,

 

My point is that there is a finite time/budget, it would unquestionably be easier for a Russian Dev team to research material in their native language (and country) and with aircraft that have data and a wealth of experience forthcoming from locally available sources, including lend lease and Luftwaffe examples.

 

It would simply be more expensive to arrange a visit to Guadalcanal (as a poor and loose example) than to Stalingrad and Moscow as done with previous titles. It is far as budget and time that will make a difference, that was my point, I still feel that these commodities are still short on the ground for the Dev's

 

obviously the team is capable, just as CLoD team was capable of researching BoB and relevant aircraft, and I said I would be pleasantly surprised if Med or Pacific were next, it is cost and commercial realities and how much can be created for a given budget that I  feel will make this unlikely for now, regardless of how many people would enjoy Pacific or Med theater 

 

Kuban with Spitfire, P-39 and A-20/B25 would? be enough draw for the West, until franchise is more stable, original Il-2 went through many iterations before 'Pacific fighters'

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

It's probably just as well for 777 that the Russian market is just 17% of the customer base. They pay so much less for their copies of the game than we do and it would be hard to survive on them alone if it wasn't for other countries paying the triple-A prices.

Lucky they are, we people of the central and eastern Europe who earn money in national currencies have to exchange them first. That often increases the actual price for us a lot. 

 

 

 

Kuban with Spitfire, P-39 and A-20/B25 would? be enough draw for the West, until franchise is more stable, original Il-2 went through many iterations before 'Pacific fighters'

That is only your assumption. Adding two different flavor cookies to the revised box won't change overall taste. 

[Asgar]

Lucky they are, we people of the central and eastern Europe who earn money in national currencies have to exchange them first. That often increases the actual price for us a lot. 

 

Central European countries that don't have the Euro: all Scandinavian countries if you consider them Central European instead of North European :D and the Swiss who actually save money if they pay in Euro.

 

sry had to :D

Edited June 1, 2016 by 6./ZG26_Asgar

[Dakpilot]

 

 

 

 

That is only your assumption. Adding two different flavor cookies to the revised box won't change overall taste. 

 

Hence "would" with a question mark.....  I am assuming nothing 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[LLv24_Zami]

Zami, but if they add some lend-lease aircraft and throw in a MTO map à la V. L. they hit off well with both markets, which is preferred.

That would be a nice compromise. 

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Central European countries that don't have the Euro: all Scandinavian countries if you consider them Central European instead of North European :D and the Swiss who actually save money if they pay in Euro.

 

sry had to :D

Poland considers itself as center of the Europe  

[Asgar]

funny :D

 

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Lol, true story. 

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]