Jump to content
Wolf8312

Be specific about why you want the pacific?

Recommended Posts

I'd like the pacific scenario for the great pacific theme and immersion, flying over the blue sea, green island with white beaches, battles raging on land, air combat over water, flying the white Mitsubishi Zero, the blue American Hellcat, taking off from a carrier in the iconic a V-wing shaped Corsair, approaching destroyers 2 meters over see level with screaming engine and flak exploding all around hoping to get close enough for that one torpedo, doing suicide runs with the squad harakiri'ing a dozen explosive-loaden Nippon fighters into a carrier, winning the mission for the God-Emperor. 

 

Yeah, that's about it ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Faust said:

But if the Battle of Midway has some new technology that proves too difficult in a reasonable timeframe and a reasonable budget, then release a Pacific Theater of Operations title that is more tractable to start. 

 

It doesn't matter where the Pacific battle is situated... it's the required information, correct translation etc of Japanese aircraft and equipment that is needed that has caused the postponement... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I think this game engine will be quite good at simulating Korea jets and props , we will find out how much so with the 262. But I would be devastated if the time era of early pacific war will not happened . This is why I stay interested and keep momentum in my support of this endeavor.

I have flown endless missions with IL 2´s and I want to do the same with the Kate , Devastator and Dauntless . Do not mind flying Val and Avenger either . And my longing and hope for Seaplanes , knowing the excellent seaplanes made by 777 for ROF , opportunity to get some of those in Pacific would be high

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simplified carriers, Pangaea-style scaled maps - I guess we could save time by simply starting up Pacific Fighters again.
Probably better anyways as there still would be plenty of Asiatic-Pacific content available after most casual users get bored by carriers...

 

 

1 hour ago, Trooper117 said:

It doesn't matter where the Pacific battle is situated... it's the required information, correct translation etc of Japanese aircraft and equipment that is needed that has caused the postponement... 

It's not as easy, but definitely doable. I've got plenty of Japanese books and many of them include extremely detailed and comprehensible schematics. Detailed Allied test reports are readily available (TAIU, ATAIU, ...). That's plenty of information and not yet including primary Japanese sources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, =27=Davesteu said:

 

Simplified carriers, Pangaea-style scaled maps 

 

Nobody suggested that.

Every aspect - EVERY aspect of the sim involves compromises and simplification on some level, to some degree.

 

Scaling the map properly would not cause a “Pangaea” effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gambit21 said:

EVERY aspect of the sim involves compromises and simplification

 

Yep name the brand, it is simplified . No one would go in a navy training for years just to learn landings and not getting a career out of it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Cloyd said:

Hey GTOA, I wasn't being critical. I've never flown a plane, never will. But give me just a few things that help me to pretend, and I'm all in. I'm OK with filling in the blanks. 😉

 

21 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

 

In all fairness there was no physics involved with your Aces of the Pacific arresting cables.

So even if they stopped there, we'd be quite a bit north of that.

 

I'm not being a contrarian for the sake of it, just lending a bit of perspective here.

I want all the cool stuff too, but it's a gigantic task.

 

I completely agree with both of you. I'm just over here dreaming of a pitching deck :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm dreaming of sitting in the cockpit of my P40-N, looking down a jungle lined runway somewhere on New Guinea, knowing that a couple of ridge lines over there is a Japanese pilot doing the same from the cockpit of his Ki 61, and I am hoping that the new P38s show up soon, as that new Japanese fighter is really fast...

 

lUqaZk.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mysticpuma that was really cool. Never played IL2 1946, looks like I missed out on a real gem. Makes me look forward to the pacific in this sim, with VR even more now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good old Pacific Fighters. Missing so many details. But I miss it even despite that, it's been so long since we had a PTO flight sim.

As for the videos, I prefer those two:

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/11/2018 at 8:55 PM, Legioneod said:

This is what we are really waiting for.

2df3ade1a9904688bf30a9700a7275e3.jpgbaccc80e4e5b3781f8bb8f6d13340f3d.jpg

 

Jeebus,  was this really a thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Feathered_IV said:

BoX still has a very long way to go.  

 

In many aspects sure. Yet, it’s also come such a long long way in many others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, danielprates said:

 

Jeebus,  was this really a thing?

 

Yup, P47s were transported by carriers and then launched by catapult to fly to their land bases. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

 

Yup, P47s were transported by carriers and then launched by catapult to fly to their land bases. 

 

Oh more like a ferry thing then an operational thing then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pacific.................me catatonic, drool is present🤤

 

Carrying torpedo and sinking capital ship......priceless!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, EAF_Ribbon said:

Carrying torpedo and sinking capital ship......priceless!

 

Game developers need to introduce a system where the player is credited for individual hits on a ship.  Not just for ships sunk.

 

It takes more than one torpedo to bring down a capital ship.  So unless you are the lucky last attacker in line, you will leave empty handed every time. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Feathered_IV said:

 

Game developers need to introduce a system where the player is credited for individual hits on a ship.  Not just for ships sunk.

 

It takes more than one torpedo to bring down a capital ship.  So unless you are the lucky last attacker in line, you will leave empty handed every time. 

 

Yeah, seems a bit weird to help sink the Yamato and score 0 points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Feathered_IV said:

 

Game developers need to introduce a system where the player is credited for individual hits on a ship.  Not just for ships sunk.

 

It takes more than one torpedo to bring down a capital ship.  So unless you are the lucky last attacker in line, you will leave empty handed every time. 

Yup didn't mean i could sink carrier with single torpedo.....team effort and sinking it should be biggest reward at least in coop and MP!

Avoiding flak and enemy fighters and droping torpedo from the right alt and speed while staying alive.....probably the hardest role in Pacific air theatre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the greatest experiences in Pacific Fighter was a low level torpedo run on a carrier group in a Torpedo bomber.  Concentrated flak coming towards you & exploding around you was just amazing.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

In many aspects sure. Yet, it’s also come such a long long way in many others.

And made a few steps back in others.

Recent AMA doesn't give a good impression in terms of upcoming improvements and / or optimization. I just can't imagine any realistic carrier battle. Even in smaller scale with the amount of Ai possibly required to drive all different kinds of aircraft and ships it would cause FPS to sink.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EAF_Ribbon said:

didn't mean i could sink carrier with single torpedo.....

 

Yep I know, cheers Ribbon!  I definitely didn’t want to suggest that you would think that was the case.  

1 hour ago, Eonel said:

One of the greatest experiences in Pacific Fighter was a low level torpedo run on a carrier group in a Torpedo bomber.  Concentrated flak coming towards you & exploding around you was just amazing.  

 

Try it as part of a group of G4Ms at night!  :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, =362nd_FS=Hiromachi said:

And made a few steps back in others.

Recent AMA doesn't give a good impression in terms of upcoming improvements and / or optimization. I just can't imagine any realistic carrier battle. Even in smaller scale with the amount of Ai possibly required to drive all different kinds of aircraft and ships it would cause FPS to sink.

 

You can't do everything all at once though. I think, from where I stand the IL2 franchise is looking quite strong atm. Single player career mode is outstanding, and MP with 84 players is actually quite respectable. Other Flight sims may have done better, but its not common to see first person shooters with that kind of number. 

The product has improved since it first launched, and I have no doubts that it will continue to do so moving forwards. Dev's priorities may not always be the same as ours, but the studio has a responsibility to make decisions in the best interest of the franchise, and while that may sound easy from the comfort of our armchairs, at the end of the day its their jobs that they put on the line.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, =362nd_FS=Hiromachi said:

And made a few steps back in others.

Recent AMA doesn't give a good impression in terms of upcoming improvements and / or optimization. I just can't imagine any realistic carrier battle. Even in smaller scale with the amount of Ai possibly required to drive all different kinds of aircraft and ships it would cause FPS to sink.

They have two more studios working and learning on the same engine......

Even they work on different titles as a part of the same platform it should give 1C/777 guys more flexibility and manpower to improve current engine.

Just my blind assumption^^^, for a start i would be happy with current performance as long we get hands on PTO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, =FEW=Herne said:

 

You can't do everything all at once though. I think, from where I stand the IL2 franchise is looking quite strong atm. Single player career mode is outstanding, and MP with 84 players is actually quite respectable. Other Flight sims may have done better, but its not common to see first person shooters with that kind of number. 

The product has improved since it first launched, and I have no doubts that it will continue to do so moving forwards. Dev's priorities may not always be the same as ours, but the studio has a responsibility to make decisions in the best interest of the franchise, and while that may sound easy from the comfort of our armchairs, at the end of the day its their jobs that they put on the line.

The sheer number of players on the server is not everything. Frankly, when you have all 84 people online servers are not performing well. WoL feels like it's about to crash and even well put TAW struggles. Not to mention that it's 84 people on the server, not 84 people in one place. In this regard this is a substantial dowgrade for me from CloD or even older products. I can't stress enough how important it is for me to fly in numbers.

Two decades ago in Warbirds with hardware and software that in comparison to what we have today is barely an updated calculator we had S3 events with not dozens but 200+ players flying around. Even in CloD when intercepting raids over Manston or Eastbourne it was common to have 30+ bombers in formations with dozens JG4 / JG26 escorts and various Squadrons of Hurricanes and Spitfires on servers like SoW or ACG. You cant replicate that here. Not even close. In this case we are down to skrimishes of few to maybe a dozen of aircraft most of the time which is a downgrade, at least for me.

 

It did improve indeed but it only proves how bad decisions were initially made to begin development of a game in 2013-2014 with Dx9c API so that it it required pretty soon update to 64 bit and transfer to Dx11.

 

1 minute ago, EAF_Ribbon said:

They have two more studios working and learning on the same engine......

Even they work on different titles as a part of the same platform it should give 1C/777 guys more flexibility and manpower to improve current engine.

Just my blind assumption^^^, for a start i would be happy with current performance as long we get hands on PTO.

We dont know who is there and how much are they meant to do. Frankly, I cant even recall how is that company doing Po-2 called.

And no, they are there to produce more aircraft as it seems from Jasons comments. What Jason lacks however is more people to code and program things, that's even in most recent AMA.

So the thing is that I'm simply not sure that with PTO we can keep current performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, =362nd_FS=Hiromachi said:

The sheer number of players on the server is not everything. Frankly, when you have all 84 people online servers are not performing well. WoL feels like it's about to crash and even well put TAW struggles. Not to mention that it's 84 people on the server, not 84 people in one place. In this regard this is a substantial dowgrade for me from CloD or even older products. I can't stress enough how important it is for me to fly in numbers.

Two decades ago in Warbirds with hardware and software that in comparison to what we have today is barely an updated calculator we had S3 events with not dozens but 200+ players flying around. Even in CloD when intercepting raids over Manston or Eastbourne it was common to have 30+ bombers in formations with dozens JG4 / JG26 escorts and various Squadrons of Hurricanes and Spitfires on servers like SoW or ACG. You cant replicate that here. Not even close. In this case we are down to skrimishes of few to maybe a dozen of aircraft most of the time which is a downgrade, at least for me.

 

It did improve indeed but it only proves how bad decisions were initially made to begin development of a game in 2013-2014 with Dx9c API so that it it required pretty soon update to 64 bit and transfer to Dx11.

 

We dont know who is there and how much are they meant to do. Frankly, I cant even recall how is that company doing Po-2 called.

And no, they are there to produce more aircraft as it seems from Jasons comments. What Jason lacks however is more people to code and program things, that's even in most recent AMA.

So the thing is that I'm simply not sure that with PTO we can keep current performance.

I'm an optimist ;) and i believe in devs!

Mostly flying on Finnish server i noticed flak isn't the problem that much as number of planes on the same spot or moving vehicles.

 

Those tank bases or how we call them flak bases don't dip down performance so much as moving tanks, but their problem is that most of the time flak is focused on only one plane at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In regards to the OP's question, I'm not one of those who wants the PTO over any other theatre (I don't have any preference) but I would enjoy it if we got it. However I would prefer if it was a campaign that also had plenty of dry land involved like NG or the Solomons, the reason being that with pure carrier ops in PF I started to get bored with the samey-sameness of it all. The Solomons would be my favourite, some carrier ops, plenty of air-to-air, anti-shipping, ground-pounding with a wider range of aircraft types over a long stretch of time (good for career mode although necessarily not for CV fans) with the added bonus that those of us who suck at carrier landings don't have to do it and the islands add some visual omph to all that ocean.
So far as the map is concerned, the Solomons maps in the old game are scaled down (I don't recall to what scale) yet I never noticed it in-game, the flight times are still very long and the terrain looked plenty big enough to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want carrier operations first and foremost, but I don't want to spend hours doing dead reckoning over featureless ocean.

 

So I agree with others, that the Solomons / Guadalcanal campaign are the best setting from a map and campaign point of view. I would happily accept carriers operating unrealistically close to shore as a concession to gaming practicality.

 

However, this leaves me in a conundrum. Excuse the blasphemy, but I have relatively little interest in flying the iconic early war types like the F4F and A6M2. I want Corsairs first and foremost, and other later types like Seafire Mk.IIIs, maybe an A7M to counter them :joy:. Which obviously don't fit on the above mentioned map, or stray into the counterfactual if we want an enjoyable and balanced MP experience in a 1944-45 time frame.

Edited by =X51=VC_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@=X51=VC_

 

Sounds like you want either a Rabaul or Palembang map with mid to late-war aircraft and carriers, with flight times a fraction of those seen at Guadalcanal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, =X51=VC_ said:

However, this leaves me in a conundrum. Excuse the blasphemy, but I have relatively little interest in flying the iconic early war types like the F4F and A6M2. I want Corsairs first and foremost, and other later types like Seafire Mk.IIIs, maybe an A7M to counter them :joy:. Which obviously don't fit on the above mentioned map, or stray into the counterfactual if we want an enjoyable and balanced MP experience in a 1944-45 time frame.

 

I doubt that we will get A7M in the future. There are only several A7M prototype, and none of production aircraft is completed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes @s9723, hence I said we might be straying a bit into counter-factual.

 

@Feathered_IV interesting scenarios for sure, but just worried about how one-sided late war encounters might be. And the fact carrier ops would be largely lacking from the IJN side in those cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you will find that with our player base, and their long experience "flying" combat on their computers, that the early war scenarios will be MUCH more "balanced", with far closer outcomes, than the real deal.

 

Is there anyone here, now, that doesn't know you don't turn with the Japaneses fighters?

 

You realize that you can "boom and zoom" with the Zeke, yes?  Hell, I did it with the A6M2-N "Rufe" float plane version with success against F6Fs.

 

Just sayin'.

Edited by BlitzPig_EL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not worried about early, but I don't fancy being in an A6M5 against an F4U-1d! Sure it "can be done" but it's unlikely to be pleasant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, =X51=VC_ said:

I'm not worried about early, but I don't fancy being in an A6M5 against an F4U-1d! Sure it "can be done" but it's unlikely to be pleasant.

 

Pfff!

No problem - fun times. :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...