What’s different from Il-2 1946...tips for a noob

[RedKestrel]

Hello all. First time posting here, but I’ve lurked for a while. I’ve played Il-2 1946 for a couple years now and I’ve finally got a machine that can run BoX on order. For someone coming from 1946 what are the big things to get used to? Eg flight modeling, landing and takeoff, engine management etc. Will experience in the old game help at all?

 

Thanks for any help you can give!

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

Welcome to the forums!

 

Experience in 1946 will certainly help. However, there are a few notable differences.

 

Flight models

• Handling is a bit less forgiving.
• Joystick curves may be necessary for precise aiming.

Takeoffs and landings

• Many aircraft have tricky ground handling.
• Good use of rudders, toe brakes, and tailwheel locks is required for taxiing.
• Be proactive on takeoff, it's usually too late to correct after things go wrong.

Engine management 

• Time-limited engine modes determined by RPM and manifold pressure (e.g., continuous, takeoff, climb, combat).
• Read the briefing notes to find these limits; exceeding them will quickly kill your engine.
• Separate keys for different cooling systems (water, oil, cowl flaps). These vary between aircraft.

In general, BoX (now Great Battles) can be seen as an evolution of 1946. It's very similar in spirit, just slightly more detailed. 

Edited February 7, 2018 by Mitthrawnuruodo

[ShamrockOneFive]

Your experience with IL-2: 1946 will absolutely help. You'll be familiar with the aircraft, you'll understand their basic handling, etc. IL-2: Great Battles Series has a more detailed FM which does make them a little less forgiving sometimes but also more forgiving at other times. I general I find the flight model to be more "communicative" with both the handling of the aircraft and the sounds all working together to make you feel more like you're there in the cockpit. Stalls are a little less of a surprise to me in most planes... You can hear/feel it coming much more so.

 

It takes a bit to adjust as everything will feel a bit alien and different... Yet... familiar. Once you're into it you'll have a hard time going back.

[[N.O.G.F]_Cathal_Brugha]

Welcome to IL-2 BoX!

 

Coming from IL-2 1946 myself, exactly what both above said. I have found ground handling to be trickier in less rudder authority at low speed sometimes. Engine management is the biggest difference though. It has more depth here with oil rad, water rad, and cowl flaps, depending on which aircraft you are flying. In IL-2 1946 you can just firewall the throttle, here that can mean instant engine death in some planes, P-40 is very easy to over rev and kill the engine if you move the throttle to quickly. With experience flying '1946 you will be able to concentrate more on the new and different things in BoX right away.

[JtD]

You'll have to get used to a different GUI/control input. For me it was a big hurdle and still is a disappointment. Physics, graphics and historical accuracy are all next generation, but that user interface is not.

[OrLoK]

The GUI, for me, is a leap forward.

 

The dumbed down limitations of earlier versions seems to have been mainly fixed.

 

I find CLOD, for example far more frustrating to use. Ymmv

 

Gamewise, expect to use Rudders on takeoff and landing.

 

Prop torque is a big effect.

 

Trim is important too.

Edited February 7, 2018 by OrLoK

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

The GUI, for me, is a leap forward.

 

 

The layout of the GUI is fine. However, it feels rather unresponsive compared to 1946. Many actions take a few hundredths to a few tenths of a second to complete (e.g., entering a mission, leaving a mission, navigating menus). 

 

I'm accustomed to games that either respond instantly or show a clearly-defined loading screen. Il-2 often does neither, and instead leaves me waiting for an uncomfortable amount of time without telling me that I should be waiting. 

 

It's certainly not a significant problem. I do agree that CloD's interface is worse because it requires far too many steps to adjust certain things. 

 

 

 

Regarding the original question, gunnery is also very different. It is far more difficult to cause catastrophic structural failure. In the old game, any cannon will destroy control surfaces or entire wings with only a few hits. 

 

Now, even sizeable 20 mm bursts often aren't sufficient. You can no longer expect targets to go down unless you aim very well. It is quite easy to expend an entire ammunition load onto one target and see the wings or fuselage absorb numerous hits. 

 

At first, this may feel a bit strange. However, it quickly becomes clear that damage modelling in 1946 is a bit cartoony. 

Edited February 7, 2018 by Mitthrawnuruodo

[Pupo]

The layout of the GUI is fine. However, it feels rather unresponsive compared to 1946. Many actions take a few hundredths to a few tenths of a second to complete (e.g., entering a mission, leaving a mission, navigating menus). 

 

 

 

The worst being setting up keys. It's unbearably slow ( ~1second)

Edited February 7, 2018 by Pupo

[Mac_Messer]

Propwash, must be aware of it at all times. It`s different on pretty much every plane, on some it is so violent that upon hitting throttle you`ll do a 360. Obviously it`s not just about taking off. Also when do you final approach, lowering throttle will make the plane yaw rather violently to the side, potentially upsetting it to the point it stalls out. Did it many times and still do occasionally.

[Lensman]

Virtual Reality.

The single greatest change.

[Brano]

Just one advice. Forget about old sturm. Its now in the league of arcade games.

[senseispcc]

The IL2 BOX series is more realistic in every way, graphics, planes handling, ballistics, wheatear including winds and clouds, motors ways of behaving and responding to inputs, etc

So many things are different that I should say it is a new game. But like the original IL2 series the development team does make the game better with each new edition/addition and it evolve into a better and more complete game, but it stays a “game” near a simulation but never impossible to play because it offers so many choices betwen levels of complexity.  

Edited February 7, 2018 by senseispcc

[Brano]

It became obsolete when Eagle Dynamics introduced their first AFM (advanced flight model) with Su-25T. With beta release of P-51D in (2011?) I never looked back. As JtD wrote. Its completly different league.

[ACG_pezman]

I feel sad that I was never aware of any of the IL2 series until the newest iteration came out with "IL-2 Sturmovik:  Battle of Stalingrad."

 

I was stuck in War Thunder (yes, this is the first WW2 sim I ever came across in the modern age, before that it was DCS - and DCS WW2 wasn't even an idea yet) and thought that game was ok.  Then I heard of this game, and the FW-190 that was coming with it, and I became a founder.  Didn't even realize the gem I was supporting.  I have been so impressed with this simulator that I feel like my investment was returned many times over.  If only my 401k made me feel the same way :/

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

Yes, BoX is far more accurate and 1946 is full of borked flight models.

 

However, I still keep coming back to the old game because it offers many things that BoX lacks (e.g., Pacific, heavy bombers, mods).

[JtD]

It became obsolete when Eagle Dynamics introduced their first AFM (advanced flight model) with Su-25T. With beta release of P-51D in (2011?) I never looked back. As JtD wrote. Its completly different league.

Yes, it is, but I wouldn't consider 1946 arcade. It's still a flight sim game, even if dated and in many ways simplified.

 

Some stuff in there is still more complex and less unrealistic than it is in BoX (engine timer thingy, for instance). The main strength of course is the diversity - you have tons of things you don't (yet) have in BoX. Carriers, floatplanes, four-engined aircraft, to name a few.

 

All in all 1946 in my eyes will never become anything bad - arcade or any other label. Same as some old cars, I'll always consider it a great classic.

[Lusekofte]

If you overlook the eyecandy and more modern game engine. In reality 

Old IL 2 got much better FBM or ME 

It got much better AI making SP campaign much more interesting

it also got Dynamic campaigns. More airplanes and maps . The logistics around the old IL 2 is much better

 

For the rest it is pretty much a updated old IL 2 with much improved graphics, Damage model effects , feel of flight and dynamics .  Rivers are a trillion times better 

[Brano]

I dont put = inbetween arcade and bad. With flight sims,for me, it is all about flight models fidelity. Frankly speaking about the rest,even old sturm didnt reach quality of UI or single player campaigns of titles like Red Baron or Aces over Europe/Pacific. I dont like UI of BoX very much. Too "sterile" . Old sturm was not better though. I miss good old UI of the oldtimers....together with breefing rooms,newspapers,movies,photos of targets..I hope new SP campaign will incorporate all of this stuff as we move on.

[BlitzPig_EL]

I still have IL2/46 installed, and probably always will.  It simply offers so many more different things to do that will not happen in any modern sim, no matter the developer.

 

Where else can i fly this?

 

 

[IckyATLAS]

I still have IL2/46 installed, and probably always will.  It simply offers so many more different things to do that will not happen in any modern sim, no matter the developer.

 

Where else can i fly this?

 

 

 

You will have to wait a little, but eventually it may come in, say two years or so. It would be a nice gift to start the new decade,  the twenties  . 

[Cloyd]

For SP play you absolutely need IL2 1946. There is no CFS that compares to it.

For MP play, I have no informed opinion.

 

Cloyd

[Gambit21]

I still have IL2/46 installed, and probably always will.  It simply offers so many more different things to do that will not happen in any modern sim, no matter the developer.

 

Where else can i fly this?

 

 

 

My dream plane

[Necrobaron]

I honestly don't recall that being flyable. Was that a mod or somesuch?

[BlitzPig_EL]

Mod in HSFX.

[Necrobaron]

AH, I gotcha. I never got into the mods and such.

[RedKestrel]

Thanks a lot everyone! This is really helpful.

One thing that worries me a little about the game is the requirement for an Internet connection. Can you play the game at all without Internet? Only reason I ask is that I may be moving to a more rural area soon and I expect my internet connectivity to suffer somewhat. 

Is there a way to play the game offline once it's activated? And can it be played if an update hasn't been downloaded quite yet? 

Finally, how big are the updates usually? 

[PatrickAWlson]

Thanks a lot everyone! This is really helpful.

 

One thing that worries me a little about the game is the requirement for an Internet connection. Can you play the game at all without Internet? Only reason I ask is that I may be moving to a more rural area soon and I expect my internet connectivity to suffer somewhat. 

 

Is there a way to play the game offline once it's activated? And can it be played if an update hasn't been downloaded quite yet? 

 

Finally, how big are the updates usually? 

 

Short answer is yes.  More here:

 

Offline Button

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

Finally, how big are the updates usually?

The updates (and the entire game download) are quite small. You won’t have to download more than a few gigabytes.

[Myscion]

As other have said landing is a big difference. In 1946 I can come down at 400 Km/h and slam on the brakes no problem. BOS is a bit more realistic and you really do want to be going slow and level during landing.

[RedKestrel]

As other have said landing is a big difference. In 1946 I can come down at 400 Km/h and slam on the brakes no problem. BOS is a bit more realistic and you really do want to be going slow and level during landing.

That hasn’t been my experience in 1946 at all. I find a lot of the planes really sensitive to airspeed on touchdown ie bouncing, ballooning etc. If landing is orders of magnitude more difficult then I am in trouble!

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

You do have to watch your speed on landing; it's easy to run out of runway if you're going too fast. Gear also breaks quite easily if the sink rate is too high. 

 

However, the touchdown feels more natural because the physics are better. It's nothing you can't get used to. 

[[N.O.G.F]_Cathal_Brugha]

That hasn’t been my experience in 1946 at all. I find a lot of the planes really sensitive to airspeed on touchdown ie bouncing, ballooning etc. If landing is orders of magnitude more difficult then I am in trouble!

It is not more difficult that 1946, just a little different. Planes don't seem to nose over as easily when applying brakes, but they may tend to veer to one side with too much brakes. Over all I find it easier to land it BoX if doing things correctly, with less bouncing or ballooning. If you can land in 1946 you will be fine in BoX.

[RedKestrel]

That’s a big if lol. Some planes I can land ok but I have trouble with others like the spitfire for example.

[ShamrockOneFive]

The updates (and the entire game download) are quite small. You won’t have to download more than a few gigabytes.

 

Though the next patch might be a bit bigger than usual

 

5 new aircraft, new game modes, I'm expecting this to be bigger.