Developer Diary, Part 195 - Discussion

[NETSCAPE]

2 minutes ago, No.615_Kai_Lae said:

Here's the question that needs to be asked: Will there be any kind of infantry? Otherwise, machine guns are decorative, and the radio position is pretty much a nonfactor. Not to mention, infantry in ground combat are..sorta important.  

 

exactly... I'd like scenarios where you see infantry advancing and maybe muzzle flashes from village structures...so, you being in a tank, must do your job = SUPPORT THE INFANTRY. So you simply load a HE shell and blow up the house. Problem solved

Edited June 23, 2018 by NETSCAPE

[Thad]

9 minutes ago, NETSCAPE said:

 

Of course I mean for player use!!! StuG III G in this battle...

Well, in that case, I fully agree with you. Perhaps that capability will be added later. 

[NETSCAPE]

Ferdinand < StuG

[Thad]

Wasn't the Ferdinand a heavy 'tank destroyer' with a 88 main gun. We don't think we have that currently even for use by AI. Correct me if I am wrong. 

 

Still the Ferdinand would be a welcomed player addition. Big, ponderous and lethal.

[NETSCAPE]

Just now, Thad said:

Wasn't the Ferdinand a heavy 'tank destroyer' with a 88 main gun. We don't think we have that currently even for use by AI. Correct me if I am wrong. 

 

Still the Ferdinand would be a welcomed player addition. Big, ponderous and lethal.

 

I'm confused by our conversation here Thad... I'm discussing the Tank Crew development. All these tanks are playable by the player. Sure the Ferdinand was involved in this battle but the Stug numbers are overwhelming... it's not only the fact that I want to be in a Stug... it's historically very significant. The Ferdinand wasn't the greatest weapons platform for many reasons. It will be a giant target with it's huge silhouette. I rather be in a sneaky Stug...sneakin around, Stug'n. 

[TP_Sparky]

I will buy the sim to support all aspects of IL2 and I hope it integrates well with our air campaigns.  I'll probably drive a tank around a bit but look for me in the sky.

 

Why the KV-1 and Tiger? Why not the Mk. IVg? The Existing T-34 and KV-1 76mm gun cannot penetrate the Tiger armor whilst the 88mm can penetrate theirs. What’s the fun in that? Given the few Tigers available at Kursk, why not give the Soviets Su-152s? Both Tiger and Su-152 can kill each other while the KV-1 cannot. Since the few Su-152’s were important in knocking out both Tigers and Elephants at Kursk I’d release the pair together. I understand releasing Rata and Bf-109F together in 1941 but in July 1943 don’t release a 1943 German tank and a 1940ish Soviet tank. 

 

I can't wait for a Flying Circus update.  Give me an early access SPAD to fly on the Kuban map and I'll be happy as a kitten.

 

 

[Jason_Williams]

34 minutes ago, NETSCAPE said:

The video looks promising but please for future sneak peaks turn off the "cinematic" motion blur camera effect. I want to see the interior of the tank not feel like I just dropped acid at a Pearl Jam concert.

 

Overall this seems exciting but I am very disappointed that there is no Stug. Here is where I could insert an argument on WHY it should be included...but I've done that elsewhere on the forum already. 

 

I hope there is more ground assets added for targets and immersion to give the feeling of a real ground battle. I imagine if it's just tank pvp it will get boring much like the other tank games out there. 

 

They should. This is an untapped market currently. I am positive this will be a big seller. Tanks sims are far a few in between. There are lots of tank bro's out there playing very outdated games because nothing new has come along in ages... 

 

We do not have the technology or resources to make infantry. We make a vehicle simulation. This will be sold under the IL-2 Sturmovik line of products.

 

Jason

[NETSCAPE]

Just now, Jason_Williams said:

 

We do not have the technology or resources to make infantry. We make a vehicle simulation. This will be sold under the IL-2 Sturmovik line of products.

 

Jason

 

I get it. from a business standpoint. The average player will care most about the PvP experience. I just hope one day to play the role of infantry support in an armored vehicle. Perhaps that experience would best fit a single player or single tank crew oriented game - not the IL-2 tank crew game. 

3 minutes ago, TP_Sparky said:

I will buy the sim to support all aspects of IL2 and I hope it integrates well with our air campaigns.  I'll probably drive a tank around a bit but look for me in the sky.

 

Why the KV-1 and Tiger? Why not the Mk. IVg? The Existing T-34 and KV-1 76mm gun cannot penetrate the Tiger armor whilst the 88mm can penetrate theirs. What’s the fun in that? Given the few Tigers available at Kursk, why not give the Soviets Su-152s? Both Tiger and Su-152 can kill each other while the KV-1 cannot. Since the few Su-152’s were important in knocking out both Tigers and Elephants at Kursk I’d release the pair together. I understand releasing Rata and Bf-109F together in 1941 but in July 1943 don’t release a 1943 German tank and a 1940ish Soviet tank. 

 

I can't wait for a Flying Circus update.  Give me an early access SPAD to fly on the Kuban map and I'll be happy as a kitten.

 

 

 

Su-152 has been on the list for Tank Crew since the start so... ?

[TP_Sparky]

3 hours ago, NETSCAPE said:

Su-152 has been on the list for Tank Crew since the start so... ?

My post discussed releasing the Tiger and KV-1 as an early access pair.  I said they were unequal opponents and a better, more equally matched opponent set is the Tiger and the already announced SU-152.  As it is, the Tiger will romp around open country, invulnerable to frontal shots from the 76mm gun of IL2's existing Soviet T-34 and early access KV-1 tanks.  So do you understand my point now?  It's like releasing the P-40B and the FW-190A as an early release pair.  You could release the P-40 or F4F Wildcat vs. the Zero as they were the best we had at that time and often fought but Tigers were cutting edge in 1943, whilst KV-1s were discontinued in mid-1943.  Su-152s would be a more worthy opponent unless you just want to be a Tiger churning through opponents that can't hurt you.

 

If the Soviets can call for air support then this could be real fun as the IL2's and Stukas arrive and fighters try to cover them and the Pe-2's dive bomb...

 

Regardless, I'll preorder anything IL2 makes ASAP from the company to support the efforts.

Edited June 23, 2018 by TP_Sparky

[NETSCAPE]

2 minutes ago, TP_Sparky said:

My post discussed releasing the Tiger and KV-1 as an early access pair. 

 

Oh my apologies, I overlooked that EA aspect. Ironically you use two planes to compare... I know far more about armor than planes  hehe. 

Edited June 23, 2018 by NETSCAPE

[TP_Sparky]

1 minute ago, NETSCAPE said:

 

Oh my apologies, I overlooked that EA aspect. 

My apologies if I seemed rude.

[NETSCAPE]

16 minutes ago, TP_Sparky said:

My apologies if I seemed rude.

 

Not at all dude. 

[SOLIDKREATE]

Wow so the tanks will be as detailed as the aircraft then? This is so cool!!!

[Fercyful]

1 hour ago, Jason_Williams said:

 

We do not have the technology or resources to make infantry. We make a vehicle simulation. This will be sold under the IL-2 Sturmovik line of products.

 

Jason

 

Thanks for confirmation Jason. But please do you know if we can kill the AI AT guns (crew) with tank machine gun fire? (Hope to have AT guns, understand the no go for infantry) Thanks!

[Thad]

The game already displays infantry around ATG and Howitzers. There is probably little reason such infantry positions couldn't be added or included in certain buildings, trench positions and or bunkers. We also currently have them manning HMGs etc.. They could add bazooka teams and such. 

 

Of course in the game weapon is being destroyed not actually the displayed infantry. Still a gun emplacement could be taken out with machine gun or HE fire.

 

Simulated armed infantry positions could obviously be added.

Edited June 23, 2018 by Thad

[Yogiflight]

1 hour ago, TP_Sparky said:

My post discussed releasing the Tiger and KV-1 as an early access pair.  I said they were unequal opponents and a better, more equally matched opponent set is the Tiger and the already announced SU-152.  As it is, the Tiger will romp around open country, invulnerable to frontal shots from the 76mm gun of IL2's existing Soviet T-34 and early access KV-1 tanks.  So do you understand my point now?  It's like releasing the P-40B and the FW-190A as an early release pair. 

Or like releasing the T 34 and the PzKw III without the Panzergranate 40?

 

+1 for including the Stug III instead of the Ferdinand, as it would make much more sense with the high numbers of Stugs that were in combat. Not including the Stug is like not including the Yak as russian fighter.

 

What is absolutely needed, too, is the 'Achtacht' 88mm Flak field version with the armored protection shield for anti tank role.

Edited June 23, 2018 by Yogiflight

[TP_Sparky]

1 minute ago, Yogiflight said:

Or like releasing the T 34 and the PzKw III without the Panzergranate 40?

 

+1 for including the Stug III instead of the Ferdinand, as it would make much more sense with the high numbers of Stugs that were in combat. Not including the Stug is like not including the Yak as russian fighter.

 

What is absolutely needed, too, is the 'Achtacht' 88mm Flak field version with the armored protection shield for anti tank role.

 

Good points but the 88 AT gun isn't as much a part of the offensive armored attacks that characterized the limited Kursk series of battles.  However, since our in-game and user-created campaigns (I'm in Tangmere Pilots, an online virtual squadron which has amazing campaigns) span long periods of time in the various BoX modules (BoBp will go from 9/44 to almost war's end in Europe) your point is well taken.  

 

I agree absolutely about the Stug III.  The Panther was almost useless at Kursk.  Aside from the catastrophic engine fire problems at Kursk they never fixed the final drive problems with Panther and Tiger that made them pretty useless as offensive weapons.  Anytime over a few kilometers were to be crossed they recommended a transporter.  T 34/85s and 17pdr-armed Shermans were reliable, suitably armed and could be used in sweeping armored movements.  Aside from historical truth about their terrible maintenance problems I suspect the Tank Crew Panthers and BoBp Me-262s will work just fine while their real-life engines/final drives would fail and catch fire.

Tank machine guns will be useful for keeping other vehicles buttoned up and destroying soft vehicles without wasting precious main gun ammo.

[=621=Samikatz]

Agreed that not including the Stug is really bizarre, thousands upon thousands of III Gs were built compared to what, 80 Ferdinands? As for the Soviets, I would've liked to see an Su-76M or maybe a Churchill, but I'm not sure what would be replaced

[616Sqn_Tyggz]

If we can operate the commander and radio mans positions in the tanks.

Why can't we have the navigator position implemented into the A-20?

It's just as important as the radio man and commander in the tank.

Not really a complaint, I'm just very curious as to why the navigators position wasn't made.

[Medicated]

2 hours ago, Jason_Williams said:

 

We do not have the technology or resources to make infantry. We make a vehicle simulation. This will be sold under the IL-2 Sturmovik line of products.

 

Jason

 

Jason, just a quick question if you are able to answer - when you say you don't have the technology to make infantry, are you meaning player-controllable infantry (like a first person shooter) or just AI infantry in general? I certainly understand not having the player-controllable aspect of infantry (and I think most are not looking for that in this title, this should be focusing on tank simulation), but would hope for AI infantry to be added to have more complete battles with tanks/armies. I do know that killing infantry can make it more difficult to sell a product in certain countries due to age restrictions, gore, etc but I still think it would be important to have the best simulation possible.

 

With or without infantry, I will still be excited to play this title as much as possible! Looking forward to early access to try it out!

[TP_Sparky]

Has there been any time-frame info on Flying Circus?  There was some mention that one aircraft at least was into "engine testing" IIRC.  What does that mean in terms of time frame?  Are we likely to get early release FC ragwings to use on current BoX maps?  I can't find any info anywhere.

[NETSCAPE]

1 hour ago, Yogiflight said:

Not including the Stug is like not including the Yak as russian fighter.

 

Seriously man... 

 

18 minutes ago, Medicated said:

(like a first person shooter) or just AI infantry in general

 

Yeah I hope he didn't assume I mean't some combined arms infantry FPS game... of course I mean't AI infantry assets, either static defensive positions (bunkers, trenches ect) or squad/platoon level that run, dive, shoot, repeat when order to "move" by the mission designers ect...

[Yogiflight]

41 minutes ago, NETSCAPE said:

2 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

Not including the Stug is like not including the Yak as russian fighter.

 

Seriously man... 

This was pretty serious. The pure numbers of the Stugs and the important role they played in armored warfare makes them as important for the german tank forces (however they were not part of the tank forces, but of artillery) as the Yak for the russian fighters.

[Fercyful]

1 hour ago, NETSCAPE said:

 

Yeah I hope he didn't assume I mean't some combined arms infantry FPS game... of course I mean't AI infantry assets, either static defensive positions (bunkers, trenches ect) or squad/platoon level that run, dive, shoot, repeat when order to "move" by the mission designers ect...

 

That! No FPS here, something like in Steel Fury can be VERY nice. Still happy can kill AT guns using machine guns, if I can get close hehe

[Jade_Monkey]

4 hours ago, 1./TG1_Nil said:

I am wondering... will they sell tank crew as a separate product on Steam?

Maybe it is the thing to do to maximise the visibility...

 

 

My guess is it will be very similar to War Thunder or DCS. One platform, different modules you can buy. 

 

I think it won't be many games in your library.

[=27=Davesteu]

23 hours ago, Roast said:

Well, no. Unless they don't plan to add the T-34/76 Model 1943 to the sim, that is.

These are a T-34/76 Model 1943 tanks

Sorry, but I have to correct you. As there is nothing wrong with the quote, I'm citing Wikipedia for ease of reference:

'Since the break-up of the Soviet Union, newly declassified sources have demonstrated that all T-34s with the original turret and F-34 gun (conventionally known as Models 1941 and 1942) were officially called "Model 1941", and hexagonal-turret T-34 (Model 1943) was officially called "Model 1942".'

------------------------------------

 

On topic of the Ferdinand I'm with you guys. StuG & StuH are iconic. Moreover the Ferdinand equipped 653rd was part of the northern thrust, not the southern this game is going to represent...

 

2 hours ago, =621=Samikatz said:

I would've liked to see an Su-76M or maybe a Churchill, but I'm not sure what would be replaced

The SU-76M was still being trialed at the time of Citadel, but the Churchill (Mk. IV) definitely would have been interesting. I asked about it during the TS Q&A after the announcement last year.

In my honest opinion much more interesting and fitting than the M4A2. The T-34 and Sherman won't differ much besides the Sherman being taller. The Churchill though would have had its very own characteristics.

...or keep the Sherman and skip on the strange SU-122?

------------------------------------

 

I'm not surprised about Jason's answer regarding Infantry. Having said this, I as well hope for pillboxes, trenches and semi-stationary AT-teams. Should be a feasible compromise.

------------------------------------

Some more questions to the Devs:

• Ammo "will be historically accurate", but is storage composition going to be as well?
• Will ammo be replenishable in the field? If yes, how is it going to work?
• Assuming tank periscopes are damageable, will we be able to replace them in some tanks like the Tiger for example?
• Will crew leave tanks if penetrated or are they fighting till the very end?

 

Edited June 23, 2018 by =27=Davesteu

[NETSCAPE]

52 minutes ago, Fercyful said:

 

That! No FPS here, something like in Steel Fury can be VERY nice. Still happy can kill AT guns using machine guns, if I can get close hehe

 

Yeah I wasn't gonna name drop but... even that ancient game had them.

[LukeFF]

5 hours ago, TP_Sparky said:

Why not the Mk. IVg?

 

Quote

7. PzKpfw III Ausf.M
8. PzKpfw IV Ausf.G
9. PzKpfw V Ausf.D "Panther"
10. PzKpfw VI Ausf.H1 "Tiger"
11. Sd. Kfz. 184 "Ferdinand"
12. Sd. Kfz. 10 + Flak38

 

[E69_geramos109]

Nice to hear about new content but some of the people (a lot)  is looking foward to see all the new bugs that appear solved. 

[Field-Ops]

7 hours ago, NETSCAPE said:

 

Of course I mean for player use!!! StuG III G in this battle...

Man I would like to see the Ferdinand replaced with the StuG. I'll buy it if its made a separate collector.

[NETSCAPE]

3 minutes ago, Field-Ops said:

Man I would like to see the Ferdinand replaced with the StuG. I'll buy it if its made a separate collector.

 

I sort of agree. I think it should be reverseed though. The StuG should be in the stock game and the Ferdinand should be collector.

[migmadmarine]

I do hope that a solution will be found at some point down the road for infantry, at least on the level of what was in steel fury. The battle will just not feel right with out them... 

[TP_Sparky]

4 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

 

I know the Mk.IVg is in the eventual tank list.  My point is that it would have made a better early access release opponent for the KV-1 than the Tiger.  People respond without reading messages.  KV-1 and Mk.IVg would have made a good pair.  Tiger and SU-152 would make good opponents. The chosen release pair, Tiger and KV-1 are mismatched IMHO.

[Juri_JS]

11 hours ago, Jason_Williams said:

 

We do not have the technology or resources to make infantry. We make a vehicle simulation. This will be sold under the IL-2 Sturmovik line of products.

 

Jason

Just add some more static infantry units, like the MGs we already have in the game. For example mortar or rifle teams that can be placed in field fortifications. I think this would be entirely sufficient. It wouldn't require any work on complex animations or AI behaviour and the soldier models that already exist in the game could be used.

Edited June 24, 2018 by Juri_JS

[Haza]

30 minutes ago, angus26 said:

Can’t please everybody. Sometimes people forget or just don’t realize how good the game is and what a good, hardworking team makes it. I’d like to see these complainers do the job Jason and the devs do. They’d be crushed instantaneously under the pressure. 

 

Well I for one have my credit card ready to pre-order whatever, as it is with purchases that we can ultimately show our support towards Jason and the rest of the team.

 

However, I do not expect a Call Of Duty or Armoured type shot em up first person type game here. I would sooner have a  NAAFI wagon selling cups of tea.

 

Regards

 

Edited June 24, 2018 by Haza

[Jade_Monkey]

5 hours ago, E69_geramos109 said:

Nice to hear about new content but some of the people (a lot)  is looking foward to see all the new bugs that appear solved. 

 

This is a dev diary, not a game update (where they post the bug fixes).

 

Not sure what's the point of such a post. Of course they are working on fixing bugs, like they have for the past few years.

[PL_Andrev]

Loool, very excited here!

Just bored and disappointed with "World of RC models" or "GrindThunder".

 

Hope player-controlled air support will be possible at multiplayer battles and no circles to capture! 

 

Quote

 losing a radioman will prevent you from talking with other tanks of your unit.

 

Does it mean that position of friendly units on map will be not updated, spotted enemy units by others will be not shown on map?

This is a game what I'm waiting for!

Edited June 24, 2018 by PL_Andrev

[Fliegel]

When BoS came out I think about somebody made simulator like this just with tanks. I didn't even dare to hope then... and here we are. Thanks!

I did try to devastate some trees and look how tracks are modeled (it is clearly not the layer system like WT use).

 

The command feature also sounds great. I wonder if that could work in multiplayer... so every player is basically a team of tanks rather a lone wolf?
 

Edited June 24, 2018 by Fliegel

[Feathered_IV]

15 hours ago, Jason_Williams said:

 

We do not have the technology or resources to make infantry. We make a vehicle simulation. This will be sold under the IL-2 Sturmovik line of products.

 

Jason

 

I think what people are referring to is infantry as static objects.  Perhaps in small destructible groups which fire AT rounds or small arms, as a hazard to tanks and tank crews.  Certainly not as a first-person shooter.

[Caudron431]

This sim is incredible in quality! i, despite being spoiled by every new update or dev diary will never forget how lucky we are. Thank you 1CGS team!

 

To all people browsing these boards and not "in" already i want to tell you: come with us, don't doubt because of some comments: the sim is superb believe me. Those comments are the only way some among us have to express their passion for this sim, you can check it yourself: after pages of whine, they are still here enjoying... This is proof!

 

This development  team is mighty. Their product is powerful: it will take you time to learn, but you will enjoy all the process if you like challenge. As i see it now it could go well beyond the first outstanding Il2.

 

Just wanted to say it.