Jump to content

Recommended Posts

 

 

Apologies if it's an ignorant suggestion, but wouldn't a Wake Island map/campaign be able to use most or at least some air and naval assets from Midway? Since it lasted for two weeks players could start at Wake then move onto Midway, thus giving the campaign some longevity.

 

You can use Wildcat (F4F-3) on Wake and also Zero, Val and Kate. However, most raids during 1941 Wake Island campaign were executed by twin engine Nells.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, look at all the activity.  I love it.  

 

[...]

 

The Technology required to model Naval Aviation is vastly different from a mechanics standpoint.  There are things that are REQUIRED for it to work properly, and provide the sense of immersion that the community is looking for, so my Theory is that Midway is purposely scoped to be a small release so that technology can be developed and implemented.  Ie. more resources have to into things that don't exist on the Eastern Front.  Some examples:

 

-  Catapults

-  Functioning Torpedoes

-  Over water Navigation for the EXPERT level players.  YE-ZB nav system and nautical charts.

-  Seaplanes and Water Physics and Effects.  Recovery of said floatplanes...

-  Aircraft Carriers, Battleships, Cruisers, Destroyers, Oilers, Transports

-  Radar and Fighter direction  (to include Radar on Picket ships)

-  Landing Signal Officers

-  The Japanese Optical landing system

-  Ship Task Force AI and formation keeping

-  Spawn-points for MP aboard a CV  (good luck with THAT one!)

-  the Air Marshall Feature tailored to a Pacific Title

-  Search and Rescue, and Maritime Recon features

-  Arresting gear Physics and effects

-  Functioning elevators

-  Functioning deck crew

-  Wingfold

-  Ship maneuvers while under attack

-  and finally, Researching the Planes.  This has to be the tallest order.  The material to properly model the aircraft and provide the FIDELITY I believe this team wants to produce is VERY difficult to find and verify.

I love the activity too. I agree largely with the above. Some of those aren't quite required but the technology to pull Midway off is daunting to be sure.

 

 

 

Imagine working throttle, stick, and pedals to trap a damaged plane on the deck of a rolling, pitching flat top moving at 25 knots.   ...    in VR!

 

Very exciting. 

 

S!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can use Wildcat (F4F-3) on Wake and also Zero, Val and Kate. However, most raids during 1941 Wake Island campaign were executed by twin engine Nells.

Then thats a good option for the japanese 5th plane choice. The americans can do a lot of different combinations but the Jpas are a little harder to get 5 planes without stretching historical accuracy of midway. Now if IL-2's BoMid actually did cover the time frame from Wake all the way to Midway then I can definitely see a better selection of aircraft the devs can choose from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You still need airbase for those bombers, they were flying from atol Kwajalein during "Wake Island campaign", some 1 100 km from Wake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed. The vast openness of the sea wouldnt be as hard to make as Kuban for the map devs though. So the only argument for that is if people are actually willing to fly that far. in SP you can get away with it by setting it to auto pilot and cranking it up to 8x speed. Multiplayer is a different story though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed. The vast openness of the sea wouldnt be as hard to make as Kuban for the map devs though. So the only argument for that is if people are actually willing to fly that far. in SP you can get away with it by setting it to auto pilot and cranking it up to 8x speed. Multiplayer is a different story though.

 

What is missing is a Kurssteurung (Mode-1). It is not auto-level, but auto-course. It lets you hold a precise course, while climbing to altitude.

 

Server stability will also need to be addressed. Crashes on multiplayer long flights are not very appealing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Always loved the Nell, it has a strange appeal to it. In theory they could make it and add it as a regular plane, with the atoll for them to take off from, but that still ends up as a 6 hour round trip which is just impossible for most people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IL2-1946 often had servers running just an ocean map and carriers. Sometimes they told you where the enemy carrier was and sometimes they expected you to find it.   I will admit that they did not usually make the flight time more than 15 minutes because it *is* very boring.  They also usually had homing beacons turned on but not always, I do remember scenarios where they just told you what course the fleet was sailing and where they expected to be by the time you returned though even then I think they had short range homing beacons to help you find them once you were close (or maybe they were just turned off until a certain time had elapsed) 

 

I would be quite happy doing a Battle Of The Coral Sea, the first pure Carrier v Carrier battle, or Midway without bothering modelling the Island itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  I will admit that they did not usually make the flight time more than 15 minutes because it *is* very boring.  

 

Anyone who can't handle a 20 minute or longer flight on any map, let alone the Pacific - well he and I can never be friends.

Seriously...flights in WWII pretty much everywhere were lengthy (with some exceptions, no need for anyone to point them out) but by and large, and especially

in the Pacific flight times were hours...and hours.

 

Anyone complaining about flights over 15 minutes on a PTO map needs his ears boxed.

Trying to keep bomber flights as short as possible for the on the Kuban map for a 1942 campaign, they're still 40 minutes or more round trip.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who can't handle a 20 minute or longer flight on any map, let alone the Pacific - well he and I can never be friends.

Seriously...flights in WWII pretty much everywhere were lengthy (with some exceptions, no need for anyone to point them out) but by and large, and especially

in the Pacific flight times were hours...and hours.

 

Anyone complaining about flights over 15 minutes on a PTO map needs his ears boxed.

Trying to keep bomber flights as short as possible for the on the Kuban map for a 1942 campaign, they're still 40 minutes or more round trip.

 

No argument from me.  The best flying I have ever done was way back in Warbirds when a special event usually involved at leasst an hours flight with doglegs over the North Sea to deepest Germany and a slightly longer return journey (as I usually had fewer working engines :-) )   Even in IL2-1946 the special event missions in the New Guinea theatre usually involved a lengthy flight in a Betty navigating with the compass from way out in the Pacific.    I would rather do an hours patrol in formation with my squad and fail to find action before returning  to base than do six ten minute fly-die-fly-die bunfights in a dogfight server.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No argument from me.  The best flying I have ever done was way back in Warbirds when a special event usually involved at leasst an hours flight with doglegs over the North Sea to deepest Germany and a slightly longer return journey (as I usually had fewer working engines :-) )   Even in IL2-1946 the special event missions in the New Guinea theatre usually involved a lengthy flight in a Betty navigating with the compass from way out in the Pacific.    I would rather do an hours patrol in formation with my squad and fail to find action before returning  to base than do six ten minute fly-die-fly-die bunfights in a dogfight server.

 

My kind of pilot.  :salute:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess at this point the question is what map size limits are the Devs willing to push. We have no idea if having a several thousand km size map will even be possible in this game, even if it is mostly water. Loading times would be horrendous and server stability is definitely a factor. So I'm going back to downsizing my recommendation and limiting it to carrier borne or float plane. Someone didnt like my A5M4 so I swapped it. I know the A6M2-N wasn't at midway proper but was at the Aleutians and a bit later. Its not like the Devs didnt do it for the Fw190 timeline. I doubt the Devs will be able to get much different from these planes given the enormous workload the pacific will bring. I'd say look at Midway as the groundwork for pacific operations anyway. If the PO-2 recon functionality succeeds then these float plane recon crafts will be good stand-ins for our normal bomber planesets. 

 

F2A-1 Buffalo (premium)

F4F-3/4 Wildcat

SBD-2 Dauntless

TBD-1 Devastator

SOC Seagull

 

A6M2 Zero

A6M2-N Zero (premium)

B5N2 Kate

D3A1 Val

F1M2 Pete

 

And I highly suspect the PBY will come in as a standalone premium after all things are said and done. I also wouldn't be surprised to see some other planes introduced as AI only like the Ju52 was. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh...we need the Rufe (A6M2-N)...no doubt about it.

Even if it we just get to use it on some generic island maps, or using the Kuban map as a stand-in.

 

I'll at least put it to use later on the Okinawa map (using that map again as a stand-in for something else)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best flying I have ever done was way back in Warbirds when a special event usually involved at leasst an hours flight with doglegs over the North Sea to deepest Germany and a slightly longer return journey (as I usually had fewer working engines :-) )

 

Hehe... I can relate to that. In the Storm of War campaign, we regarded anything less than 2 hours as "short". I certainly have no problems with a longer flight. I'm only just starting to get into BoX, but already my mission times are creeping up.

 

 

 

And I highly suspect the PBY will come in as a standalone premium after all things are said and done. I also wouldn't be surprised to see some other planes introduced as AI only like the Ju52 was. 

 

Good point.

 

Given the enormous complexity of the PBY-Catalina, the idea of it starting as an AI model is a good one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying to keep bomber flights as short as possible for the on the Kuban map for a 1942 campaign, they're still 40 minutes or more round trip.

True. Currently I fly the stock Stalingrad campaign, and although targets are fairly close, generally not more than 70 to 80 km apart, I spend more than half of the route to the target with climbing to altitude if I'm assigned to a level bombing or intercept bombers mission at 4000+ m. (Sometimes I struggle to get to altitude prior to reaching the mission point.) When I got to altitude, I usually use level autopilot and sometimes even time compression, and my experience is that not even the shortest mission with the closest target can be shorter than 35 minutes if you fly it from take-off to landing.

I guess the bare minumum flight time can be calculated according to this formula: the time needed to get to altitude with the given payload; multiplied by 2; and 5 to 10 minutes added for action. This will never be less than 30 minutes (apart from air starts or scramble missions against low-flying enemies).

Edited by sniperton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

F2A-1 Buffalo (premium)

F4F-3/4 Wildcat

SBD-2 Dauntless

TBD-1 Devastator

SOC Seagull

 

A6M2 Zero

A6M2-N Zero (premium)

B5N2 Kate

D3A1 Val

F1M2 Pete

 

And I highly suspect the PBY will come in as a standalone premium after all things are said and done. I also wouldn't be surprised to see some other planes introduced as AI only like the Ju52 was. 

 

This is an excellent plane set.  I would be all over this one.

 

:salute:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the enormous complexity of the PBY-Catalina, the idea of it starting as an AI model is a good one.

I remember reading that creating an AI only plane is almost as much work as creating the real deal. This was based on the experience they had with the Ju52.

 

Obviously they dont have to make interiors and all the key mapping for each control but the FM is still a lot of work and the skins and modeling too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The cockpit is a huge, HUGE extra amount of work compared to an AI only plane though.

Plus an AI only plane can often used a pasted in flight model from another aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The cockpit is a huge, HUGE extra amount of work compared to an AI only plane though.

Plus an AI only plane can often used a pasted in flight model from another aircraft.

 

I very much doubt that the developers would settle for a 'pasted in' flight model. Not least because nothing else they are likely to model would be remotely like a PBY.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I very much doubt that the developers would settle for a 'pasted in' flight model. Not least because nothing else they are likely to model would be remotely like a PBY.

 

With regard to the PBY I completely agree. However I wasn't talking specifically about the PBY. :)

 

For a future, (non-PBY) larger, non-fighter, multi-engined AI only aircraft however, a pasted in flight model from a similar aircraft would more than suffice, and yes it's doable, and I have no doubt such a thing would/should happen in the

event of more AI only planes.

 

Anyway the notion is largely moot at this juncture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Big 4 engine heavies I can definitely see being brought in as AI only if they wanted to dabble in the possibility of them ever coming to fruition in IL-2.

 

As for Midway I'm hoping Jason can discuss his plans in something like a Q&A session in a few months so we can get a better idea of what to expect. Then we can narrow down our suggestions instead of broad over the top expectations. Planned maps is probably the key to what types of planesets to expect. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading through the thread I've modified my list that is based on numbers present at Midway.

So I've now gone for a floatplane for each side, and reluctantly left out the Catalina and Betty.

Also, I've gone for an 'unbalanced' lineup. The Premium edition could be 6:4 in favour of the US; no important Japanese plane is left out.

 

Standard:

 

128x SBD Dauntless

85x F4F-4 Wildcat

42x TBD-1 Devastator

approx. 25x SOC-3 Seagull

 

 

93x B5N2 Kate

85x A6M2 Zero

72x D3A1 Val

27x E13A1 Jake

 

Premium:

 

20x F2A-3 Buffalo

6x TBF-1 Avenger

 

Extra Collectors:

 

26x PBY-5 Catalina

 

Other Notable Planes:

 

11x SB2U-3 Vindicator

4x B-26 Marauder

2x D4Y1 Judy

0x G4M1 Betty

 

The Vindicator was obsolete by Midway and although I'd like it, it doesn't have a future in further BoPacific titles.

I would really like the Catalina instead of the TBF, but the TBF wouldn't impact on future editions as they would need the TBM as well, and I think that it might be popular.

And as much as I'd like the Marauder, Judy and Betty I think that they have sales potential in subsequent expansions rather than being an add-on here.

 

Fingers crossed that we get a good representation of the actual battle, whatever planeset is in it. Most of the hard work to be done is going to be in the carriers, although the cruisers and (hopefully) IJN battleships will be time-consuming too.

 

Cheers.

Edited by 216th_Cat
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Standard:

 

128x SBD Dauntless

85x F4F-4 Wildcat

42x TBD-1 Devastator

approx. 25x SOC-3 Seagull

 

 

93x B5N2 Kate

85x A6M2 Zero

72x D3A1 Val

27x E13A1 Jake

 

Premium:

 

20x F2A-3 Buffalo

6x TBF-1 Avenger

 

Extra Collectors:

 

26x PBY-5 Catalina

 

Other Notable Planes:

 

11x SB2U-3 Vindicator

4x B-26 Marauder

2x D4Y1 Judy

0x G4M1 Betty

 

Looks good.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only care about these:

128x SBD Dauntless
42x TBD-1 Devastator
93x B5N2 Kate
72x D3A1 Val
6x TBF-1 Avenger
11x SB2U-3 Vindicator
2x D4Y1 Judy

 

And these I would buy 10 BOMidway for

 

 

SOC-3 Seagull

 

 

E13A1 Jake

 

 

PBY-5 Catalina

 

 

B-26 Marauder

 

 

G4M1 Betty

 

I really give a damn about the rest , let the fighter guys have what they want even if it means jet fighters. 

Edited by 216th_LuseKofte
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, did either the Seagull or the Jake play any (remarkable) role at Midway?

Edited by sniperton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. Jake is possibly responsible for one one of the failures during the events. Seagull is nice though, but then I dont see a single reason for Jake. Better give one more aircraft to Americans (F2A) or Judy to Japanese. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah, there are better lists elsewhere in this thread. The core AC are pretty much set. Let's get some period appropriate and interesting collectors in there. I don't want collectors that are boring and DEVs won't build anything that wont make money at this point in development anyway. 

Edited by II/JG17_HerrMurf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. Jake is possibly responsible for one one of the failures during the events.... but then I dont see a single reason for Jake.

Because it was there? Because it was around at Pearl harbour, Coral Sea and used as a kamikaze later? And if the pilot of one of those from the Tone had done his job properly the entire outcome of the battle might have been different?

It doesn't really bother me whether there is the Jake or Pete in the game, but your reasons against the Jake are flawed.

Edited by 216th_Cat
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Nah, there are better lists elsewhere in this thread.

No there isn´t

 

 

 

I don't want collectors that are boring

 

Nothing boring in it

 

 

 

DEVs won't build anything that wont make money at this point in development anyway. 

 

I said I buy 10 BOMidway for them

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because it was there? Because it was around at Pearl harbour, Coral Sea and used as a kamikaze later? And if the pilot of one of those from the Tone had done his job properly the entire outcome of the battle might have been different?

It doesn't really bother me whether there is the Jake or Pete in the game, but your reasons against the Jake are flawed.

You want it then you can make one. And arguments that it was around Pearl Harbor,  Coral Sea or used as kamikaze can be applied to every other aircraft already considered. Seriously, thinkconsider how little Jake offers compared to any other premium. I dont feel like paying for that worthless crap, there are much better choices than Jake as Premium. Considering they are looking for Pete data already the idea of sticking yet another floatplane is wrong. And no, my reasons against Jake are valid. Each expansion gives 5 aircraft per side, Jake is a waste of a slot and it has no effective way to participate in any multiplayer scenario. It's slow, has limited range, no means of protecting itself and no armament against ships it can possibly encounter. It would be another Po-2 except I'm ok with Po-2 since its being sold separately and has far more purpose than Jake. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No there isn´t

 

Au Contraire and neener neener :)

 

 

Nothing boring in it

 

Yawn :)

 

 

I said I buy 10 BOMidway for them

 

That would make us 429995 units to go then. Better open that wallet. :)

Edited by II/JG17_HerrMurf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jake is a waste of a slot and it has no effective way to participate in any multiplayer scenario. It's slow, has limited range, no means of protecting itself and no armament against ships it can possibly encounter.

You must be thinking of a different aircraft.

 

SPEED

 

Pete 370 km/h

Jake 375 km/h

 

RANGE

 

Pete 1,090 km

Jake 2,070 km

 

CEILING

 

Pete 9,440m

Jake 8,700m

 

ARMAMENT

 

Pete 2x 7.7mm MG forward plus 1x 7.7mm MG rearward

Jake 1x 7.7mm MG rearward plus 1x 20mm cannon downward

 

PAYLOAD

 

Pete 120kg bombs (2x 60kg)

Jake 250kg bombs (1x 250kg)

 

NUMBERS BUILT

 

Pete 1,118

Jake 1,418

 

This site summarises things nicely.

 

https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=443

https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=1387

 

None of this is likely to change your mind though, which doesn't matter as I don't care. I'd rather see an MBR-2 and He115.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I still think you guys are getting way too wrapped up in the fact that Midway is in the title. For sure carrier warfare will be the focus but there will almost definitely be island maps of some sort. Not to mention the potential for DEV supported third party map makers. Remember too, there are three basic types of flyers in this sim; fighter jocks, attack guys and level bombers/mud movers, with some crossover guys in dive bombers. Taking both of those things into account I find it perfectly acceptable to include the Betty and B-26 or preferably the Catalina and include torpedoes for them as an option as well.

Edited by II/JG17_HerrMurf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

{...}  there are three basic types of flyers in this sim; fighter jocks, attack guys and level bombers/mud movers, with some crossover guys in dive bombers.

 

... and transport

 

... and recon

 

... and air-sea rescue

 

...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

ake is a waste of a slot and it has no effective way to participate in any multiplayer scenario. It's slow, has limited range, no means of protecting itself and no armament against ships it can possibly encounter. It would be another Po-2 except I'm ok with Po-2 since its being sold separately and has far more purpose than Jake. 

Are you the one deciding it is a waste of slot?

I have spent the time I have in this game in planes you describe here, for you endless search and dogfight might be your kind of fun, to me it is utterly waste of time. Yesterday I shot down one 109 and 1 110 in the same mission but got only two groundtargets on two missions, and that bugged me. In this game you only need to spray and pray to get another plane down, while a slow general purpose plane is a real challange to get home alive in. This is what I and many others do and consider fun. It is not up to anyone of us to deem a plane waste of slot, time and money. Because this game is us, not you or me

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you the one deciding it is a waste of slot?

I have spent the time I have in this game in planes you describe here, for you endless search and dogfight might be your kind of fun, to me it is utterly waste of time. Yesterday I shot down one 109 and 1 110 in the same mission but got only two groundtargets on two missions, and that bugged me. In this game you only need to spray and pray to get another plane down, while a slow general purpose plane is a real challange to get home alive in. This is what I and many others do and consider fun. It is not up to anyone of us to deem a plane waste of slot, time and money. Because this game is us, not you or me

You quickly put a stamp on me. Not surprised. I'm not deciding on any choice made in this game, I'm merely deciding which aircraft I consider valuable as Premium or not. It's my personal opinion to which I believe I'm entitled to, just as you are to yours. 

I've spent about as much time in fighters as I did in attackers and ground pounders, whether that would be Hs 129 or Il-2. 

 

 

So you wont buy BoMidway without big heavy bombers in your planeset that don't fit on carriers?

You missed the point mate, I've never stated I'm looking for big heavy bombers. Frankly I think they dont have any place in Midway expansion, though if New Guinea would ever appear I'd love to get B-17. 

 

 

You must be thinking of a different aircraft.

 

 

 

SPEED

 

Pete 370 km/h

Jake 375 km/h

 

RANGE

 

Pete 1,090 km

Jake 2,070 km

 

CEILING

 

Pete 9,440m

Jake 8,700m

 

ARMAMENT

 

Pete 2x 7.7mm MG forward plus 1x 7.7mm MG rearward

Jake 1x 7.7mm MG rearward plus 1x 20mm cannon downward

 

PAYLOAD

 

Pete 120kg bombs (2x 60kg)

Jake 250kg bombs (1x 250kg)

 

NUMBERS BUILT

 

Pete 1,118

Jake 1,418

 

 

This site summarises things nicely.

 

https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=443

https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=1387

 

None of this is likely to change your mind though, which doesn't matter as I don't care. I'd rather see an MBR-2 and He115.

You still rely on English sources which gives a wrong perspective. Besides, I wasnt comparing it to Pete. I took it for granted that F1M will be a part expansion, so if Jake would have to be added, it would be probably as a premium only. And thus its primarily a challenge to compare it other options such as A5M4, F2A3, D4Y1, G4M1 or whatever else was proposed. 

But regardless of that, Jakes armament consisted only of 7.7 flexible Type 92 machine gun for gunner/navigator. The 20 mm downward pointed Type 99 cannon was added only to a few machines that were performing patrol duties along the Chinese coastline or over Philippines - primarily against submarines. In regard to ordnance, Jake could carry bombs, but if you could find me a picture of one with a bomb being launched from cruiser I'll be obliged. So far I've never seen a single picture of one with bomb probably because 250 kg bomb is quite big and heavy - you would have to store  them on a cruiser, have  tools to attach it while seaplane is standing on catapult and then make sure its possible to launch aircraft off the catapult with added weight. So far the only known to me picture of Jake with bombs attached comes from May 1945 where two machines were being prepared for kamikaze mission:

YBrBit.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the overwhelming numbers of BF 109, and Yak pilots here use the same rethoric, and those limbering along in the slow big fat targets seldom got anything to say. Take a good look at COD. The moment bomber-pilots stop flying fighter pilots does too. It is a domino effect .  

In my opinion there simply cannot be too many seaplanes, and I will use a lot of energy working for we get them. I know Jason and his team are perfectly capable to judge what worth building or not.

What you say may tip the balance over to WT like mindset, even among the developers. And that would be a shame. I see absolute no reason going for BOMidway if we´re not going to have the typical plane set that actually was there. I mean why bother. 

Seaplanes should be there, and do not say they have no interest it is bolox 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I still think you guys are getting way too wrapped up in the fact that Midway is in the title. For sure carrier warfare will be the focus but there will almost definitely be island maps of some sort. Not to mention the potential for DEV supported third party map makers.

 

 

I really hope you are right and we will get more than just Battle of Midway map. I have never seen any information from DEVs leading to believe that there will be another map however. We will see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any map which requires aircraft to "spawn-in" in flight over water to keep flight distances reasonable for a simulator product, 

 

is a bad idea.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...