Battle of Midway- the carriers....

[Blitzen]

I know this is a long way off but I am curious about the various large aircraft carriers that will be required.Over at RoF there have been discussions & questions going back for years asking about Zepplins and basically the answer always came back they are too big to properly render ( too may pixels or polygons or something like that.) Carriers are also quite large & at least on the exterior are even more complex than Zepplins .It would bet even more so with a deck load of aircraft. I assume that there would be very little need for interior rendering ( but perhaps quite a bit of damage modeling?)and they would be AI in the way that the carriers are in the vintage Il-2 Sturmovik sim They might even have deck crews.So my question is if they can't do big objects like a Zepplin on RoF ( which shares a similar game/graphic engine as BoM et al,) how in the world will they do carriers. The question becomes even more relevant when one ponders that in some senarios there might be 7 carriers operating in the same waters at the same time....

Edited October 1, 2016 by Blitzen

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Add to that the destroyers, cruisers with numerous AAA etc. Quite a bit to handle.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

I assume thats why Kuban is inbetween, to get time for the technology to grow and gain some experience with smaller ships like destroyers and cruisers. Those river vessels we have in BoS are very fine work so trying something bigger is a natural step. 

 

Not only carriers, dont forget destroyers, cruisers, battleships, transport ships and oilers (US Neosho rings a bell). 

 

I guess engine improvements on the way to Midway are supposed to make all that possible. 

[Feathered_IV]

I suspect the developers thought sensibly about zeppelins and concluded that anything that required a ten to twelve hour round trip for each mission would probably be a waste of time.

[sinned]

US and JP carriers would be in high definition, full color, high polygon and have roaring sound.

I belive BOS' carrier models would easily supercedes those 3D carriers on discovery channels.  Just the thought of taking off / landing on these carriers make me jizz in my pants. 

 

Perhaps BOS will be the first simulation game ever to produce such high fidelity ww2 carrier models. 

[6./ZG26_McKvack]

Not sure how much but DX11 will probably help with that 

[BlitzPig_EL]

Here is the Order of Battle for Midway from Wiki...

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midway_order_of_battle

 

No way the game engine will handle all those ships, DX 11 or not.

 

I suspect there will have to be some "creative" cutting of the number and type of forces involved, and I'm guessing no more than two carriers per side with limited escort.

[hames123]

Yes, but remember, the ships will make up for a lack of terrain on the map. Also, hopefully the Air Marshals can get people to listen and gather in the torpedo bombers, before launching a mass attack.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Here is the Order of Battle for Midway from Wiki...

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midway_order_of_battle

 

No way the game engine will handle all those ships, DX 11 or not.

 

I suspect there will have to be some "creative" cutting of the number and type of forces involved, and I'm guessing no more than two carriers per side with limited escort.

I think we've had this discussion before and I agree there will be some creative homolgation of surface types but I would expect in the initial release;

 

Two types of carriers, one each of a single battleship, cruiser, destroyer, submarine and maybe a tender or oiler for each side.

 

You can have a reasonable facsimile of the battle with these six to seven types and fill out the whole order of battle with DLC's down the road. You can also do Pearl, Wake and the Coral Sea with the same six types, though, you might need some sort of troop ship and/or landing barges for Wake. The most exciting thing remains the likelyhood of high fidelity carriers. I can wait for every iteration of them if the initial ones are good. I am hoping the damage models really shine as well. I have concerns about persistent smoke in this engine.

Edited October 2, 2016 by II/JG17_HerrMurf

[hames123]

Well, I hope we get 3-4 types of Crusiers and 4-5 types of Destroyers. After all, the mapmakers might have a little free time on their hands.(Please devs give us the Japanese half carrier half battleship)

[Bearfoot]

The artwork is one thing. 

 

The render distance is another.

 

Try some of the missions with watercraft (e.g., those barges coming down the Volga on the Stalingrad map).

 

Come in at 4500-5000 m on a Stuka to dive bomb them.

 

They pop into existence when you are almost on top of them.

 

If you did not know that they were there, you would never find them from a distance.

 

Over the Pacific, at 4500-5000 m, in the best case (no clouds) you want to be able to see those "faint, white whiskers" of ship wakes on the horizon (paraphrasing actual contact reports). Clouds, atmospheric conditions etc. make things more difficult and bring things closer, but the baseline case is a render distance far, far, far, far, far, far, far, greater than anything any sim engine we have currently can handle.

Edited October 3, 2016 by Bearfoot

[hames123]

I like using the Stuka to bomb things, the trick is to fly at 2000M and look for tracers or a wake in the water. However, often the ship itself does not come into view until about 1500 to 1000 metres(I just dive on the wakes until the ship appears)

[BlitzPig_EL]

Attacking a barge in a Stuka is a long way from attacking an aircraft carrier with it's escorting destroyers and cruisers that is running at 30+ knots have have literally hundreds of AA guns trained on you.

[Bearfoot]

Attacking a barge in a Stuka is a long way from attacking an aircraft carrier with it's escorting destroyers and cruisers that is running at 30+ knots have have literally hundreds of AA guns trained on you.

Yes, of course.

 

But I was not talking of the difficulty of the attack: I was talking about the render distance ...

[wtornado]

Here is the Order of Battle for Midway from Wiki...

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midway_order_of_battle

 

No way the game engine will handle all those ships, DX 11 or not.

 

I suspect there will have to be some "creative" cutting of the number and type of forces involved, and I'm guessing no more than two carriers per side with limited escort.

Should be pretty interesting.

 

We better order our D wave computer now.hehehe

 

 

Just this December, Google announced that D-Wave's latest model, its 2X quantum annealer, was 100 million times faster than its conventional computing counterpart

at solving a test problem involving almost 1,000 variables.

If it is good enough for NASA it is good enough for us too.

[PantsPilot]

TBH I'm really hoping they go Okinawa before Midway. 1C were the first people to do Okinawa in a combat flight sim and I reckon it's still fresh enough to do again. This series has been all about early war so far, with Kuban being mid-war. It would be great to have some heavily armed/armoured late war aircraft for a change IMO. Add to that campaigns/carrers for all sides including the BPF with it's Seafires, and that would be one hell of a game that would appeal to everyone I think except of course the Luft fans I guess, but they've had plenty of fresh meat lately! Finally KAMIKAZES!! This would tend to make Midway look a little boring I think..

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

I'm really hoping that Okinawa will be dropped in the process. There are better battles to portray late war efforts, namely Leyte Gulf. 

[PantsPilot]

I'm really hoping that Okinawa will be dropped in the process. There are better battles to portray late war efforts, namely Leyte Gulf. 

Leyte Gulf was more of a naval battle than an air battle TBH. To represent the Philippines in 1944-45 the devs would be spending the rest of their lives producing one hell of an enormous map! By contrast Okinawa is doable as one map set perhaps even with some of the small island staging posts from Southern Japan included. It was a proper air campaign too - very little ship to ship activity, and like I said brings in the BPF which played a very important role in the final stages of the Pacific War, especially with it's carriers with armoured decks - after a Kamikaze hit (and there were plenty), the deck crew survivors swept the remains of the plane over the side and carried on air ops.

Also Okinawa saw the first use of some of Japan's most powerful fighters such as the N1K2-J Shiden-Kai (George) - the improved version with 4x20mm cannon, and the Ki-100 Goshiki-Sen.  

[Gambit21]

Both less interesting or important than the Solomons or New Guinea. Kamikazes are about the least interesting thing to consider from Japanese side of things/from a perspective of being a fan of Japanese aviation, as I am as well as others. Battles/campaigns where both sides were equally equipped and effective should come first really.

The George came along too late and the pool of Japanese pilots was bled by that time. Early/mid war is where it's at.

It was not an important or impactful aircraft, and neither was the Ki-100 for the same reasons.

 

Zeke vs Wildcat is the sweet spot and should be explored fully - then you the Oscar which is also much more interesting than either of the 2 aircraft you mentioned.

Late war when Japan was more or less on it's knees is not the most interesting thing to explore unfortunately.

Edited October 3, 2016 by Gambit21

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Jason is already planning on expanding the render distance. It was in the live QA last month. I would expect it sometime during the Kuban chapter but that's just my opinion.

[Gambit21]

That will help tremendously when flying bombers.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Battle of Leyte Gulf was a combined operation that involved both Army and Navy using land, air and naval forces. There is no need to represent whole Philippines, building a map around Samar and Leyte (with Leyte Gulf obviously), Negros, Cebu and Bohol islands with a southern tip of Luzon would be sufficient for a campaign lasting since October 1944 until January 1945. Whole area is less than 140 000 km², with about half of it being water (various straits, seas and gulfs). Kuban map is 300 x 400 km (which is 120 000 km²). Quite contrary, whole Okinawa idea would take twice as much since you need not only Okinawa (since it was cut off island it was not used as a base for operations) but also Tokunoshima, Amamishima, Yakushima islands and decent part of Kyushu island to represent all Kikusui operations. And Okinawa would be a lot harder to play, since flight from Kagoshima (southern tip of Kyushu) to center of Okinawa is less than 600 km, while comparable flight from Negros northern airfields to Tacloban on Leyte is less than 200 km, and there are closer airfields on Cebu already. 

 

Okinawa also excludes completely Japanese Navy, unless you count Ten-ichi-gō with sinking of Yamato. And I really liked what Jason said about ships and how important he wants them to be in Midway, thus taking a step to largest naval battle in history - Leyte, seems natural and more appropriate to show ships. 

 

Leyte includes four naval engagements including :

- carrier battle

- Japanese battleships under attack from TF 38 aircraft

- Japanese battleships engaging escort carriers (am I the only one who would love to take off from one of those things and play a mission with a task to slow down Yamato at any cost to save carriers ?)

 

To that you have to add massive land operations on Leyte, counter landings at Ormoc bay and Japanese paratroopers drop at US a airfields. Then there is air element of Japanese looking for US aircraft carriers, trying to prevent or delay landings, Japanese carrier based aircraft trying to hit US carriers, US counter-strike sinking Ozawa force. And you even have Kamikaze if you really want them, since thats the time when those type of operations began.

It's a multidimensional operation of a scale of map no greater than what we have.  

 

And could provide a nice perspective on changes in naval air forces since major engagements of 1942 are very different from 1944. 

 

 

 

Also Okinawa saw the first use of some of Japan's most powerful fighters such as the N1K2-J Shiden-Kai (George) - the improved version with 4x20mm cannon, and the Ki-100 Goshiki-Sen.

Ki-100 is more a legend. And Leyte can also include N1K2-J as a collectors plane, thats not a problem just like Mc 202 or FW 190 were not.  

 

 

 

Both less interesting or important than the Solomons or New Guinea.

I find both interesting. But I dont expect to exclude New Guina.

Frankly, my idea of this would be as follows:

Midway -> New Guinea/Solomons -> Leyte

This gives a full scale of Pacific operations, and best part is that machines introduced in Midway expansion can be fully utilized in New Guinea/Solomons, while machines from both Midway and NG/Solomons can be used during Leyte.

[Gambit21]

Yes - that would be about perfect.

Making wise use in the second release of the aircraft developed for the Midway release is vital IMHO.

[Picchio]

My hope is that aircraft carriers are seriously considered by the team as a chance to really design and bring deeper innovations - AI combat routines, comms worthy of their name, a visual damage model that doesn't only put black pixelated spots before snapping parts away, and my favourite of course, high-resolution and complex cockpit self shadows - and not just as another surface for planes to land on... a well-known zebra has almost exhausted the list of all the potential landing locations...

 

That said, I'm really looking forward to see what BoK brings, once it's out. I hope it really proves itself successful in anticipating what the Pacific can or is going to be.

Edited October 3, 2016 by Picchio

[Gambit21]

Someone mentioned holes in the aircraft/damage that were not just black spots and DX 11 in another thread.

This is not a DX11 specific feature, as it simply makes use of the alpha channel in a texture. It's more a function of the game engine and how/if it is able

to make use of the alpha channel. It's a fairly simple thing to do working in a 3D program, might not be a simple to get it to work in this game

engine...but it's basic functionality in any 3D program.

 

Holes in AC will not EVER be actual holes in the mesh.

[Picchio]

Someone mentioned holes in the aircraft/damage that were not just black spots and DX 11 in another thread.

This is not a DX11 specific feature, as it simply makes use of the alpha channel in a texture. It's more a function of the game engine and how/if it is able

to make use of the alpha channel. It's a fairly simple thing to do working in a 3D program, might not be a simple to get it to work in this game

engine...but it's basic functionality in any 3D program.

 

Holes in AC will not EVER be actual holes in the mesh.

 

I know how it works and that isn't the issue, I think.

The way it is now, having the same number of pixels for texturing aircraft of all sizes is a huge limit, the way I see it.

It's just like wanting to paint a whole room with the same quantity of paint you've used for a single wall.

And bullet holes don't have to be actual geometry but sure they - as well as all sorts of damage - can be represented in a much less rudimental way than what it is right now. I have my dreams, what can I say

 

For starters, just to get rid of the visible pixelation of the "black holes", we've got right now, larger skin textures would be needed, as the "damage" texture for each aircraft basically fits on top of them.

Larger textures also imply that the team must have either worked on a higher resolution source and then resized it, or that all textures will have to be done from scratch.

And larger textures require a lot more work to get a good final result. Which means a lot more time (and this sort of approach isn't really what BoX seems to strive for, but I can be wrong).

Now (another pretty wish of mine), in the hypothesis of having high-res cockpits for BoS/BoM on DX11, you can see how this kind of hope is kind of desperate...

 

Sorry for going slightly off-topic.

Edited October 3, 2016 by Picchio

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Well, Ai will have to work not only on a single ship and its guns/maneuvering but also moves and reactions of whole ship formations. But thats why we have Kuban, to see on smaller scale with smaller ships how far this can go. I'm positive they can work that out. 

[Gambit21]

As much as I'm a obsessed with the PTO - I'm genuinely looking forward to Kuban.

[PatrickAWlson]

I suspect the developers thought sensibly about zeppelins and concluded that anything that required a ten to twelve hour round trip for each mission would probably be a waste of time.

 

Fact is that by early 1916 zeps were large, slow, very flammable and very expensive targets.  Anything that can be routinely shot down by a BE2 is not awesome.

 

Back on topic ... The carriers were quite distinct too, so it's not one or two, it's six or seven. 

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Well, all depends what is considered Midway. Whole operation MI takes more than Nagumo force (Akagi, Kaga, Hiryu, Soryu) but also ships assigned to Main Body (Yamato, Mutsu, Nagato, Hosho ...), Guard Force (Ise, Hyuga, Fuso, Yamashiro) and Aleutians Force (Ryujo, Junyo). US Navy also had extensive assets. And thats only big ships, now heavy cruisers, light cruisers, seaplane tenders, destroyers ... some could certainly be skipped but it still requires quite a bit of work. 

[Blitzen]

All this is assuming that there will actually be an "Historic" that is a series of missions that reflect the real day by day battle.I'm not sure we will see that but more likely like BoS & BoM a series of campaign missions based around the maps of the area but having very little to do with the actual battle.The same might also be said on CloD where they actually have the assets ( that is they can put many aircraft in the air at one time) to do a general day by day with success of the SP player having an influence on the outcome of the campaign, but for a variety of reasons that isn't how things are designed.I think the last time I actually saw that happen was in the now prehistoric Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe,in which you could train up members of a squadron to all be aces & then unleash them onto in incoming force.

  Perhaps the new campaign design coming here will be some sort of improvement?

[PatrickAWlson]

I think the last time I actually saw that happen was in the now prehistoric Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe,in which you could train up members of a squadron to all be aces & then unleash them onto in incoming force.

  Perhaps the new campaign design coming here will be some sort of improvement?

 

Badly off topic so apologies, but ... You can do it on BoS today with PWCG.  Your squadron mates improve over time.  If they die they are replaced by newbies.  If you take care of your AI mates you will eventually be flying with veterans and aces.

Edited October 3, 2016 by PatrickAWlson

[Lusekofte]

I like using the Stuka to bomb things, the trick is to fly at 2000M and look for tracers or a wake in the water. However, often the ship itself does not come into view until about 1500 to 1000 metres(I just dive on the wakes until the ship appears)

 

I have no problems spotting ships at 3 K altitude in time for a dive, the rendering of target is not a problem for me until I am at a non GPS server at high altitude levelbombing. Only then I cannot adjust in time for bomb drop . And that is a game killer, at 5 K altitude I still can dive the target.

But this is a issue the developers know we are not satisfied with, like the infamous FW 190. They know, and I think and hope this is one thing that is going to be fixed

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

Relax guys!! Hardware improvement will bring greater render distances soon. Just like happened on classic IL2.

[PantsPilot]

Both less interesting or important than the Solomons or New Guinea. Kamikazes are about the least interesting thing to consider from Japanese side of things/from a perspective of being a fan of Japanese aviation, as I am as well as others. Battles/campaigns where both sides were equally equipped and effective should come first really.

 

The George came along too late and the pool of Japanese pilots was bled by that time. Early/mid war is where it's at.

It was not an important or impactful aircraft, and neither was the Ki-100 for the same reasons.

 

Zeke vs Wildcat is the sweet spot and should be explored fully - then you the Oscar which is also much more interesting than either of the 2 aircraft you mentioned.

Late war when Japan was more or less on it's knees is not the most interesting thing to explore unfortunately.

 

 

 

I don't see anything uninteresting about the late war in the Pacific or Burma for that matter, where Japan was still on the offensive in 1944 for example. It doesn't matter which planes came along too late, the point is they came along - the German jets for example can't just be discounted because they came along too late. The devs of the original il-2 chose Okinawa for a good reason - Imperial Japan had it's back to the wall and fought like a caged tiger, even more so than Nazi Germany did. The Kamikaze was unique back then and was the most extreme way to try and redress the balance. More importantly Japan produced aircraft, mostly fighters, that were at last on a par with the allies, fighters that didn't only rely on nimbleness and manouvreabilty but on the more successful attributes of power, armament and pilot/fuel cell protection, though still inferior to the allies in many ways, hence the reliance on the Kamikaze as the new striking weapon of choice against ships, especially carriers. 

 

The A6M2 Zero v the F4F was only a small part of the war against Japan. Some of the biggest air battles in terms of numbers involved actually occurred in 1944-45, over the Philippines, Okinawa, Japan and also the Burma-India borders. Japanese fighters like the N1K2-J and J2M of the Navy and the Ki-84 and Ki-100 of the Army, were on a par with the F6F, F4U and Seafire in many ways, and a vast improvement on earlier fighters whose performance and agility came at a terrible price - they were lightweight fire traps for the pilot.

 

Both sides WERE more equally equipped in 1944-45, because of the Kamikaze as the striking weapon which was hard to stop, the USN soon learnt that massed AAA fire stopped the bombers/torpedo planes, that's presuming any got past the "blue umbrella of the CAP, fortunately at Midway they had intelligence of Japanese intentions. In fact in 1944-45 at last Japan had some sort of parity with it's fighters in the ones I've mentioned, even the last Zero to see widespread use now packed 2x20mm cannon and 3x13mm mg's. Allied pilots had some nasty shocks late war and found many enemy fighters more dangerous than they had been earlier. The whole point is that the mighty allied armada advancing towards Japan relied on one thing and one thing only - it's aircraft carriers. After the nasty early surprises - caused as much by the the allies pursuing a doctrine of defeating Germany first as much as anything else which left the Pacific short of what it needed, they believed that the worst was over. 

 

The reason Okinawa WAS more important than the S. Pacific you mention was because it would put USAAF B-29's in a position to sustain a proper strategic bombing offensive against Japan. That was why 1. Japan fought so furiously and 2. The US was willing to accept such crippling losses in men and machinery to wrest that place from Japan. Yes Japan was running short on skilled pilots, but some elite units were formed and of course the Kamikazes gave Japan a striking force that didn't need much training at all. In actual fact the best of the remaining Japanese pilots were often used to escort the Kamikazes down to Okinawa, and it was these pilots flying improved and potent late war fighters often mounting batteries of 4x20mm cannon, that enabled the campaign to be in the balance for some time, and the reason incidentally that the BPF was called in because it's carriers had armoured decks.  

 

Personally I'd find trying to down a Kamikaze hellbent on hitting my ship, before it was able to do so, and chasing through my own AAA to achieve it, pretty damn exciting. I seem to remember it was one of the most talked about features in il-2 PF before release, and after too for that matter. But hey lets wait and see. I'll spend my money on my own preferences.      

Edited October 3, 2016 by PantsPilot

[PatrickAWlson]

One advantage of a Kamikaze campaign is the cost savings in developing it.  One mission.  Done.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

 

 

One mission.  Done.

Sounds to me like a typical P-40 flight   

[Blitzen]

Badly off topic so apologies, but ... You can do it on BoS today with PWCG.  Your squadron mates improve over time.  If they die they are replaced by newbies.  If you take care of your AI mates you will eventually be flying with veterans and aces.

I use PWCG...but didn't know it did that- interesting!

[Gambit21]

 

Both less interesting or important than the Solomons or New Guinea. Kamikazes are about the least interesting thing to consider from Japanese side of things/from a perspective of being a fan of Japanese aviation, as I am as well as others. Battles/campaigns where both sides were equally equipped and effective should come first really.

 

The George came along too late and the pool of Japanese pilots was bled by that time. Early/mid war is where it's at.

It was not an important or impactful aircraft, and neither was the Ki-100 for the same reasons.

 

Zeke vs Wildcat is the sweet spot and should be explored fully - then you the Oscar which is also much more interesting than either of the 2 aircraft you mentioned.

Late war when Japan was more or less on it's knees is not the most interesting thing to explore unfortunately.

 

 

 

I don't see anything uninteresting about the late war in the Pacific or Burma for that matter, where Japan was still on the offensive in 1944 for example. It doesn't matter which planes came along too late, the point is they came along - the German jets for example can't just be discounted because they came along too late. The devs of the original il-2 chose Okinawa for a good reason - Imperial Japan had it's back to the wall and fought like a caged tiger, even more so than Nazi Germany did. The Kamikaze was unique back then and was the most extreme way to try and redress the balance. More importantly Japan produced aircraft, mostly fighters, that were at last on a par with the allies, fighters that didn't only rely on nimbleness and manouvreabilty but on the more successful attributes of power, armament and pilot/fuel cell protection, though still inferior to the allies in many ways, hence the reliance on the Kamikaze as the new striking weapon of choice against ships, especially carriers. 

 

The A6M2 Zero v the F4F was only a small part of the war against Japan. Some of the biggest air battles in terms of numbers involved actually occurred in 1944-45, over the Philippines, Okinawa, Japan and also the Burma-India borders. Japanese fighters like the N1K2-J and J2M of the Navy and the Ki-84 and Ki-100 of the Army, were on a par with the F6F, F4U and Seafire in many ways, and a vast improvement on earlier fighters whose performance and agility came at a terrible price - they were lightweight fire traps for the pilot.

 

Both sides WERE more equally equipped in 1944-45, because of the Kamikaze as the striking weapon which was hard to stop, the USN soon learnt that massed AAA fire stopped the bombers/torpedo planes, that's presuming any got past the "blue umbrella of the CAP, fortunately at Midway they had intelligence of Japanese intentions. In fact in 1944-45 at last Japan had some sort of parity with it's fighters in the ones I've mentioned, even the last Zero to see widespread use now packed 2x20mm cannon and 3x13mm mg's. Allied pilots had some nasty shocks late war and found many enemy fighters more dangerous than they had been earlier. The whole point is that the mighty allied armada advancing towards Japan relied on one thing and one thing only - it's aircraft carriers. After the nasty early surprises - caused as much by the the allies pursuing a doctrine of defeating Germany first as much as anything else which left the Pacific short of what it needed, they believed that the worst was over. 

 

The reason Okinawa WAS more important than the S. Pacific you mention was because it would put USAAF B-29's in a position to sustain a proper strategic bombing offensive against Japan. That was why 1. Japan fought so furiously and 2. The US was willing to accept such crippling losses in men and machinery to wrest that place from Japan. Yes Japan was running short on skilled pilots, but some elite units were formed and of course the Kamikazes gave Japan a striking force that didn't need much training at all. In actual fact the best of the remaining Japanese pilots were often used to escort the Kamikazes down to Okinawa, and it was these pilots flying improved and potent late war fighters often mounting batteries of 4x20mm cannon, that enabled the campaign to be in the balance for some time, and the reason incidentally that the BPF was called in because it's carriers had armoured decks.  

 

Personally I'd find trying to down a Kamikaze hellbent on hitting my ship, before it was able to do so, and chasing through my own AAA to achieve it, pretty damn exciting. I seem to remember it was one of the most talked about features in il-2 PF before release, and after too for that matter. But hey lets wait and see. I'll spend my money on my own preferences.      

 

 

Unlike the Eastern Front I know this theater very well.

 

In any case, from a U.S./Allied perspective it would be interesting for a minute until the novelty wore off, since that aspect alone hardly makes for an interesting campaign and like I said,

it represents Japan all but defeated and desperate and when the air war historically get's less interesting in some respects.

 

Both sides were not equal in 44-45 but I don't have time to type a tome here.

The good thing is that as virtual pilots that doesn't have an effect on how successful we can be as individuals - that's the beauty of it.

 

(Side note -  I never saw or heard about a Kamakaze my entire time in Pacific Fighters then later in 1946. As a mission builder I don't think I was aware it was possible.

Sure that didn't come later?)

[ShamrockOneFive]

 

Unlike the Eastern Front I know this theater very well.

 

In any case, from a U.S./Allied perspective it would be interesting for a minute until the novelty wore off, since that aspect alone hardly makes for an interesting campaign and like I said,

it represents Japan all but defeated and desperate and when the air war historically get's less interesting in some respects.

 

Both sides were not equal in 44-45 but I don't have time to type a tome here.

The good thing is that as virtual pilots that doesn't have an effect on how successful we can be as individuals - that's the beauty of it.

 

(Side note -  I never saw or heard about a Kamakaze my entire time in Pacific Fighters then later in 1946. As a mission builder I don't think I was aware it was possible.

Sure that didn't come later?)

 

 

Kamikaze was in from the start. I experimented with missions early on (all you needed was a GATTACK waypoint with a selected target and no further waypoints) and used it to good effect when I released a campaign called Facing the Wind: http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?name=Downloads&file=details&id=3110

 

The kamikaze defense missions were intense. You'd have a pretty limited window of opportunity to spot and intercept the kamikaze attackers before they could get to shipping. Sometimes it was easy but other times it was down to the wire with the Destroyer AA kicking up a huge cloud of flak and you trying to pick off sometimes burning but still potentially deadly kamikaze aircraft. I had a lot of fun making the campaign and building it around the Okinawa scenario. I'd love to go back there... I know others aren't so sure about it but I think it's a great place to do battle with the USN, BPF and Japanese. Hopefully the map would encompass the southern part of Kyushu as well.