Developer Diary, Part 185 - Discussion

[Mesha44]

I am going to hazard a guess that the release date must be close.  If it was still 6 weeks off there would be little point in working one extra day.  You only make a big push like that at the very end.

 

Hats off to you guys for doing it.

[SquashmanMikeEH]

Firstly, thanks to the development team for their extremely hard work in bringing us this incredible flight simulator.

I was delighted to see the new aircraft and look forward to their imminent  (hopefully)  arrival, but my question is this -

 

Have we at, AT  LAST, got a TORPEDO carrying aircraft in the A20 ? - the video showed only a bombload, so my fear is that we still lack a torpedo carrying aircraft!!!

 

Over to you Jason & co?

[Juri_JS]

Have we at, AT  LAST, got a TORPEDO carrying aircraft in the A20 ? - the video showed only a bombload, so my fear is that we still lack a torpedo carrying aircraft!!!

Did the A-20B receive attachment points for the Type 45-36 torpedo?

[Chief_Mouser]

From what I've read the A-20C carried torps, not the 'B' model. Even if some 'B's did use them I don't think we'll be seeing them in this release - not the slightest mention in any of the DDs, and one hell of a surprise if it's included.

[ShamrockOneFive]

A long time ago they said no torpedo dropping aircraft for now. I did a lot of reading to try and find out if the VVS used torpedoes on their A-20Bs and it doesn't seem to be the case. The A-20C for sure and I think they did with their A-20Gs as well but not the B variant.

 

They still used them on anti-shipping operations preferring to do high speed low altitude skip bombing attacks.

[1/JSpan_Wind75]

As always a fantastic job!

 

Thank you very much for the effort and work that each of the members of the development team brings.

 

Many Congratulations to all and I hope you share a time with family and friends to get to 2018 with great enthusiasm.

 

I have some doubts about the theme of campaign mode like some of my colleagues in the forum (Pilot's career) but this thread is only to thank them and congratulate them for the end of the year parties.

 

HAPPY END OF YEAR AND A FANTASTIC AND NEW 2018

 

This video of mine is some years old but the music is still beautiful for these days

 

Edited December 30, 2017 by 1/JSpan_Guerrero

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

The VVS preferred mast top bombing to torpedo runs in general. The latter need you to be a sitting duck for the run, to then drop a tube that failed to reach the target half the time.

 

Brilliant DD as always, and thanks for the great year! С наступающим!

Edited December 30, 2017 by 216th_Lucas_From_Hell

[CCG_Pips]

GREAT DD !!!  Thanks a lot devs for your super work.

 

[Lusekofte]

Thank you, looks very nice

[CrazyDuck]

Thank you for the update.

 

No doubt, La-5FN will shine in all it's glory, but I'm really looking forward to Yak-7B as well.

[Yogiflight]

 

 

Have we at, AT LAST, got a TORPEDO carrying aircraft in the A20 ? - the video showed only a bombload, so my fear is that we still lack a torpedo carrying aircraft!!!

It was clearly stated, no airborne torpedoes at the release of BOK. They wanted to develop them for the Pacific, as it is not too easy to do and will need some time. As the Pacific is not coming next two or so years, it is very unlikely, that they will work on it soon. On the other side, who knows, it wouldn't be the first surprise.

[dburne]

It was clearly stated, no airborne torpedoes at the release of BOK. They wanted to develop them for the Pacific, as it is not too easy to do and will need some time. As the Pacific is not coming next two or so years, it is very unlikely, that they will work on it soon. On the other side, who knows, it wouldn't be the first surprise.

 

Yeah, with this team they have certainly surprised us on many occasions.

What an incredible year of productivity they have had!

 

If 2018 is anything like this year, no telling what they will accomplish.

[Mac_Messer]

Thanks for the video - a really good promoting material for people that are still on the fence with BoK. And one can finally see just how much work had to be done to make the defensive guns on the A20 usable according to the detail BoX series are famous for. Also, the La5FN canopy view all around is excellent - I really cannot fathom how can anyone complain about it.

 

A few questions about those :

- about using the upper/lower guns - is it an either/or question of usage or two players will be able to use them at the same time?

- is A20 going to feature a mod that places russian 12,7mm (UB if I`m not mistaking) instead of the .30 cal?

 

 

I am going to hazard a guess that the release date must be close.  If it was still 6 weeks off there would be little point in working one extra day.  You only make a big push like that at the very end.

 

Hats off to you guys for doing it.

Different impression here. All five aircraft still need some work, the new campaign model is being tested. Would seem at least 3-4 weeks minimum being the optimistic scenario. Now I`m speculating ofcourse, cuz we will know once 3.001 gets released.

Edited December 31, 2017 by Mac_Messer

[Danziger]

That A20 video makes it so easy to imagine how badass a BoX model of a B17 would be. This is going to be on par with the DX11 update with it's epicness.

[MrNoice]

yeah B17 would be nice for the upcoming ME262 too

[Field-Ops]

It would probably take them a full year to make the B17. Tieing up their engineering department with little return for all the time spent because they couldn't make other stuff alongside its development. 

[Royal_Flight]

As much as I like bombers, a four-engined heavy wouldn't be a good fit. The altitude, range and sheer numbers involved wouldn't make for a convincing job, and I'd hate to see air starts with two B-17s being halfheartedly escorted by a single disinterested Mustang at 30k ft while everyone else is furballing in the weeds.

 

Keep BoX tactical.

And add more non-fighters.

[56RAF_Roblex]

As much as I like bombers, a four-engined heavy wouldn't be a good fit. The altitude, range and sheer numbers involved wouldn't make for a convincing job, and I'd hate to see air starts with two B-17s being halfheartedly escorted by a single disinterested Mustang at 30k ft while everyone else is furballing in the weeds.

 

Keep BoX tactical.

And add more non-fighters.

 

All good points plus let us not forget that with the current graphical limitations you cannot do anything more than bomb a vague geographical location from that altitude and it does not carry enough bombs to mak ethat worth doing.   That will lead to people flying B17s at 10,000ft instead which is unhistoric and also pointless as the A20 has pretty much the same bombload and can do the job better.  Of course the mosquito can also drop the same bombload and do it better than both the A20 & B17 :-P 

Edited January 2, 2018 by 56RAF_Roblex

[Stig]

All good points plus let us not forget that with the current graphical limitations you cannot do anything more than bomb a vague geographical location from that altitude

 

 

This part would not be that far from being historical.

[Danziger]

They should definitely postpone Bodenplatte and focus on a B17 module.

[Redglyph]

A B-17 would be awesome, but there are already a lot of airplanes (including some like the Ju-52 with little purpose and which is apparently not entirely finished). And would it be relevant in the current conflicts?

 

What we really need is more support to build campaigns especially regarding the AI, just flying around is nice but after a while it's nice to have a sense of purpose ;-)

 

Postpone Bodenplatte? It's not as if it were already there, and definitely no, I'd rather have a rather westward map set, thank you very much

[Raptorattacker]

 

 

I'd rather have a rather westward map set, thank you very much

AND the planes that are coming with it, so yeah!!    

They should definitely postpone Bodenplatte and focus on a B17 module.

Are.... are you mad????!!!! Noooooooooo!!!!!! 

[CF-105]

Relax, I know/hope he's joking, guys.

[Frenchy56]

They should definitely postpone Bodenplatte and focus on a B17 module.

Aren't you the guy that got banned for 3 days in the last diary discussion?

Edited January 4, 2018 by Frenchy56

[Macross]

A B-17 would be awesome, but there are already a lot of airplanes (including some like the Ju-52 with little purpose and which is apparently not entirely finished). And would it be relevant in the current conflicts?

 

What we really need is more support to build campaigns especially regarding the AI, just flying around is nice but after a while it's nice to have a sense of purpose ;-)

 

Aggree, ju52 is nice looking plane and nice to fly, but unlike in SP missions, thers no use in MP. It would be nice if dropping paratroopes to airfields and other locations would have impact to game, that those AI troops would conquer that place without need of destroying, if enough troops are deployed.

So you could use either bomber/fighter or non combat to take down enemy targets.

[56RAF_Roblex]

Aggree, ju52 is nice looking plane and nice to fly, but unlike in SP missions, thers no use in MP. It would be nice if dropping paratroopes to airfields and other locations would have impact to game, that those AI troops would conquer that place without need of destroying, if enough troops are deployed.

So you could use either bomber/fighter or non combat to take down enemy targets.

 

Yes make more missions for the JU52 to be useful but first make sure the Li-2/DC3 is done before anyone considers silly things like B-17s.   We already have some servers using JU-52s for resupply and paratroopers but as the VVS has no equivalent then we end up with the VVS having to land supplies and troops under fire using a toothless PE2 while the JU52 just has to get to the field & drop them in passing before dying (Finnish) or we end up with the LW being able to drop supplies and the VVS just not having that ability at all  (Coconut)

[LLv34_Temuri]

Yes make more missions for the JU52 to be useful but first make sure the Li-2/DC3 is done before anyone considers silly things like B-17s.   We already have some servers using JU-52s for resupply and paratroopers but as the VVS has no equivalent then we end up with the VVS having to land supplies and troops under fire using a toothless PE2 while the JU52 just has to get to the field & drop them in passing before dying (Finnish) or we end up with the LW being able to drop supplies and the VVS just not having that ability at all  (Coconut)

The Pe-2 not having paradrops is mitigated somewhat by the Pe-2 being a whole lot faster plane than Ju-52. But yeah, Li-2 is sorely needed.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Aggree, ju52 is nice looking plane and nice to fly, but unlike in SP missions, thers no use in MP. It would be nice if dropping paratroopes to airfields and other locations would have impact to game, that those AI troops would conquer that place without need of destroying, if enough troops are deployed.

So you could use either bomber/fighter or non combat to take down enemy targets.

You can already do that in current MP. The editor has triggers for paratrooper drop and landed for events like capture airfields.

 

What is missing out so far is

- Medevac

- staff ferrying

Edited January 4, 2018 by 6./ZG26_5tuka

[Danziger]

Aren't you the guy that got banned for 3 days in the last diary discussion?

Are you confusing me with someone else or just making things up?

[Royal_Flight]

Scrap the Kuban release, cancel the A-20 and give us drivable trains.

 

I had I'll thought for doing a B-17 that involved releasing it as a single detailed module in its own map, a bit like 'the Mighty Eighth' where a team of people can multicrew a B-17 to the target and back, taking on different roles; but then I realised I was basically describing a DCS-style approach and that's the last thing I want BoX to start doing.

[ITAF_Rani]

Scrap the Kuban release, cancel the A-20 and give us drivable trains.

 

I had I'll thought for doing a B-17 that involved releasing it as a single detailed module in its own map, a bit like 'the Mighty Eighth' where a team of people can multicrew a B-17 to the target and back, taking on different roles; but then I realised I was basically describing a DCS-style approach and that's the last thing I want BoX to start doing.

Be patiente Royal..this is a great developer team and sure in the future they will realize it Edited January 5, 2018 by ITAF_Rani

[56RAF_Roblex]

Scrap the Kuban release, cancel the A-20 and give us drivable trains.

 

 

With manable AA guns of course :-)  Actually it could be kind of fun to sign up to drive or defend a train to bring vital supplies and then spend 30 minutes praying you don't actually see any action 

Edited January 5, 2018 by 56RAF_Roblex

[Raptorattacker]

With manable AA guns of course :-)  Actually it could be kind of fun to sign up to drive or defend a train to bring vital supplies and then spend 30 minutes praying you don't actually see any action 

... and if it was British Rail it would always be late so any intelligence on it's movement would be completely useless!!

[hotshotmike1001]

looking forward to fly the new  american  planes P39 and A20  

Edited January 5, 2018 by hotshotmike1001

[Frenchy56]

Are you confusing me with someone else or just making things up?

Well, you got warned at least. I think it was for racist statements?

 

Also, you must be insane if you want a B-17 in a game that represents tactical air war. The B-17 is a strategic bomber.

[Danziger]

Well, you got warned at least. I think it was for racist statements?

 

Also, you must be insane if you want a B-17 in a game that represents tactical air war. The B-17 is a strategic bomber.

You should probably check your facts before making up lies, spreading rumours, falsehoods and slanderous statements.

 

There's conspiracy here and I shall seek it out!

Edited January 5, 2018 by BorysVorobyov

[Royal_Flight]

Be patiente Royal..this is a great developer team and sure in the future they will realize it

I'm not that fussed with heavy bombers in BoX really. As I stated above I think the scale is too broad and the focus should remain on the tactical level.

But there is a niche in the market for a high-fidelity, multi-crewable WWII strategic bomber simulation, but I don't think BoX can - or should - be the one to provide it.

 

With manable AA guns of course :-) Actually it could be kind of fun to sign up to drive or defend a train to bring vital supplies and then spend 30 minutes praying you don't actually see any action

I was being sarcastic initially, but now I think I've persuaded myself that my own flippant suggestion would be a good idea.

I'm not a rail enthusiast but I'd absolutely happily drive a steam locomotive through a warzone.

 

... and if it was British Rail it would always be late so any intelligence on it's movement would be completely useless!!

For the sake of realism, any British rail DLC should be priced at two grand for a year's use.

And every so often your digital crew would go on strike and you can't play the game for a few days at a time.

[No601_Swallow]

For the sake of realism, any British rail DLC should be priced at two grand for a year's use.

And every so often your digital crew would go on strike and you can't play the game for a few days at a time.

 

Harsh. 

 

But so true...

[=EXPEND=Capt_Yorkshire]

Hi dev dudes .  loading into the wings of liberty server is proving difficult at the moment due to an influx of new players   would love a queuing system if possible, i'm looking forward to the next update, cheers.

[[APAF]VR_Spartan85]

Hi dev dudes . loading into the wings of liberty server is proving difficult at the moment due to an influx of new players would love a queuing system if possible, i'm looking forward to the next update, cheers.

This is kinda a win lose no?

 

The sim is finally getting the amount of players we want online all the time, but now we cant join server because full

 

This is kinda exciting but maddening at the same time