When the Battle of Korea can be started?

[Legioneod]

1 hour ago, 6./ZG26_Custard said:

 

Korea would be good but.......

 

I would prefer this theater , flying a Sandy or an F-4

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'd leave WW2 for this. Vietnam would be so great. A6 Intruders, Skyraiders, F-4, F-8, A-4, F-100, F-105, Huey, Mig-21, Mig-19, Mig-17, the list goes on and on.

[Guest deleted@83466]

I think the addition of early jets in Bodenplatte is fine and appropriate.  However, I think when you start getting into Korean War and certainly beyond, the "no click" philosophy that works so well in WW2 aircraft starts to come across as a bit of an oversimplification as you start having more and more complex aircraft.   Arguably, the Korean War might not be too much of a stretch (that rubber band is being stretched pretty far though, imo),  F-4's and Mig-21's, and planes with radar and missiles?...no way!  In fact, going in to such an era, without radically altering the IL-2 philosophy on complexity and control implementation, a la DCS, strikes me as ludicrous.

Edited August 23, 2018 by SeaSerpent

[Legioneod]

10 minutes ago, SeaSerpent said:

I think the addition of early jets in Bodenplatte is fine and appropriate.  However, I think when you start getting into Korean War and certainly beyond, the "no click" philosophy that works so well in WW2 aircraft starts to come across as a bit of an oversimplification as you start having more and more complex aircraft.   Arguably, the Korean War might not be too much of a stretch (that rubber band is being stretched pretty far though, imo),  F-4's and Mig-21's, and planes with radar and missiles?...no way!  In fact, going in to such an era, without radically altering the IL-2 philosophy on complexity and control implementation, a la DCS, strikes me as ludicrous.

Idk about that. Flaming cliffs does an alright job of it. I like click pits and want them in Il2 but I dont think not having them should prevent going into more complex aircraft.

[Gambit21]

You don’t need click-pits with Korea - not even close.

[Legioneod]

Just now, SeaSerpent said:

 

I don't like Flaming Cliffs.

Me either but I was using it as an example on how you really don't need click pits for complex aircraft. In all honesty I very rarely find myself actually clicking anything in DCS, whenever I fly the A-10C or Mig-21 I just use key bindings or HOTAS. Click pits are very cumbersome when flying imo, but I do enjoy the startup.

[Guest deleted@83466]

1 hour ago, Legioneod said:

Idk about that. Flaming cliffs does an alright job of it. I like click pits and want them in Il2 but I dont think not having them should prevent going into more complex aircraft.

 

I don't like Flaming Cliffs aircraft.  I'd rather developers not give complex aircraft the FC-style treatment.

 

I don't particularly like clickable-pits myself.  I use iPads with labelled controls instead of having to use my mouse or else, memorize a million key commands.  However, nor do I like the FC approach to things, which is to take a very complex jet-age aircraft and simplify them into a small handful of generic controls.   My argument is that past a certain level of aircraft complexity, it starts to feel pretty gamey to me, and not so much a "simulation".

Edited August 23, 2018 by SeaSerpent

[Herne]

10 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

 

I don't like Flaming Cliffs aircraft.  I'd rather developers not give complex aircraft the FC-style treatment.

 

I don't particularly like clickable-pits myself.  I use iPads with labelled controls instead of having to use my mouse or else, memorize a million key commands.  However, nor do I like the FC approach to things, which is to take a very complex jet-age aircraft and simplify them into a small handful of generic controls.   My argument is that past a certain level of aircraft complexity, it starts to feel pretty gamey to me, and not so much a "simulation".

 

I think as VR and associated peripherals (gloves) mature and become more mainstream, Flight sims will quite naturally evolve to accommodate them. Still years away from that day though, but the tech may be available sooner than we think.

 

With KTO we don't need to worry about complex weapons avionics, which is I think the source of your concern ?

[-TBC-AeroAce]

Imo Korea with out click pits would be fine and maybe early French Vietnam but not much past that.

Edited August 24, 2018 by AeroAce

[Legioneod]

I don't really understand the need for click pits. Every possible function in the aircraft can be mapped to your keyboard or joystick. In every DCS aircraft I own I almost never use click pits in flight, only time I'm ever clicking buttons is for startup.

 

Do I want click pits in Il2? Yes

 

Do I think they are needed for complex aircraft like Mig-21 or F-105, etc? No.

Edited August 24, 2018 by Legioneod

[Artunius]

It's not like the Mig-21 is really that complex anyways with that old school radar.

[Guest deleted@83466]

1 hour ago, Artunius said:

It's not like the Mig-21 is really that complex anyways with that old school radar.

 

I don't agree with that statement.  I don't have it up and running right now to refer to my key mappings, but if recall, that "old school" radar takes up at least 6 or 7 separate keyboard bindings all by itself.   Sure you can always simplify, simplify, simplify, but at what point are you oversimplifying an aircraft and the capabilities of it's systems?  

 

You guys could possibly sell me on IL-2 Korea...I'm warming to the idea...but IL-2 Vietnam, I just can't see it....?

 

 

Edited August 24, 2018 by SeaSerpent

[Artunius]

21 minutes ago, SeaSerpent said:

 

I don't agree with that statement.  I don't have it up and running right now to refer to my key mappings, but if recall, that "old school" radar takes up at least 6 or 7 separate keyboard bindings all by itself.   Sure you can always simplify, simplify, simplify, but at what point are you oversimplifying an aircraft?  

 

 

 

Yeah, it's an "old school" radar. It came out in the late 60's I believe? I work on avionics for a living, I would think I would understand a rudimentary radar system when I see it. A couple of extra binds aren't really a big deal if they want to bring over every function, which I doubt would be the case. The more modern things get, the more bored I will be, especially if we start getting into F-35's with HMD's. WWII is sort of my escapism right now from the modern realities of BVR fighting, since blowing something up 10 miles away with a AMRAAM isn't exciting for me at all.

 

That being said... the Mig-21 is a fantastic aircraft and still one of the fastest jets to this day. It would be a blast to fly in a Great Battles series, simplified or not. We already have quite a few simplified procedures for things as it is, and I don't think this was ever made out to be a study sim.

[Guest deleted@83466]

1 hour ago, Artunius said:

 

Yeah, it's an "old school" radar. It came out in the late 60's I believe? I work on avionics for a living, I would think I would understand a rudimentary radar system when I see it. A couple of extra binds aren't really a big deal if they want to bring over every function, which I doubt would be the case. The more modern things get, the more bored I will be, especially if we start getting into F-35's with HMD's. WWII is sort of my escapism right now from the modern realities of BVR fighting, since blowing something up 10 miles away with a AMRAAM isn't exciting for me at all.

 

That being said... the Mig-21 is a fantastic aircraft and still one of the fastest jets to this day. It would be a blast to fly in a Great Battles series, simplified or not. We already have quite a few simplified procedures for things as it is, and I don't think this was ever made out to be a study sim.

 

No, Il-2 wasn't made out to be a "study sim", but because the aircraft are relatively simple, it doesn't feel like one is missing much from it not being a study sim.  It strikes a great balance.  All I've been saying is that when you reach a certain level of complexity and workload, in increasingly complex jet-age aircraft, with missiles and radar and all the rest, the current control philosophy used in IL-2 (and Flaming Cliffs in the DCS universe) might start to oversimplify things to the point where it would feel gamey to me, because otherwise you either need to have a zillion controls to capture the essentials of operation, or you need to start leaving a lot of things out.  It's a matter of opinion as to how much one would be willing to see simplified, or just what someone would see as essential functionality.   

Edited August 24, 2018 by SeaSerpent

[Artunius]

27 minutes ago, SeaSerpent said:

 

No, Il-2 wasn't made out to be a "study sim", but because the aircraft are relatively simple, it doesn't feel like one is missing much from it not being a study sim.  It strikes a great balance.  All I've been saying is that when you reach a certain level of complexity and workload, in increasingly complex jet-age aircraft, with missiles and radar and all the rest, the current control philosophy used in IL-2 (and Flaming Cliffs in the DCS universe) might start to oversimplify things to the point where it would feel gamey to me, because otherwise you either need to have a zillion controls to capture the essentials of operation, or you need to start leaving a lot of things out.  It's a matter of opinion as to how much one would be willing to see simplified, or just what someone would see as essential functionality.   

 

There are two sides of the coin there, I’ve been going back and reading through the developer diaries when I’ve been bored at work this week, and I’ve been seeing some of their design choices. I don’t really think it would be too hard to go in and make things manipulatable with the mouse, as most of the control surfaces move anyways. That can always be done later if they have the time. Right now it seems their focus is on pumping out quality planes that fly close to their real life counterparts. That’s a worthy comprise to me, even if I have to keybind everything like I’m playing an old simulator. Gamey or not. 

 

With VR getting quite big now and crapping all over TrackIR in terms of immersion, it doesn’t make much sense to be trying to find a bind on your keyboard when you’re wearing a headset. I can see more sims in the future going for hand controls and becoming even more immersive and realistic. It’s only a matter of time. Look how far we’ve progressed in the last twenty years of sims versus the last two years, night and day.

 

Things might not be there today, but we have a bright future ahead of us. 

[Royal_Flight]

Korea is fine but anything beyond that is too far. The BoX engine isn’t built for BVR at all and there isn’t any in-depth systems modelling, as suggested by the fuel management, oil pressure gauges, bombsights and weapon trigger groups. 

 

This is fine for WWII props and early jets but anything beyond that will start to push against the limitations. 

 

The strength of the BoX devs is their ability to get ten compatible aircraft released to an adequate standard to fly in appropriate combat missions over a suitable map, and support it with patches, engine updates and the occasional extra 109. 

Adding clickpits and modelling systems would up the compexity, along with the cost and time, which BoX doesn’t actually require in order to work as a combat flight sim. 

I wouldn’t be keen on spending £60 for a single aircraft for BoX that’s taken two years to develop a la DCS, and I doubt I’m alone in that. 

 

Plus, with so much of WWII still to do, there’s not really a need to jump too far ahead. I’m keen on Korea, but I don’t expect this would be more than a single release, and by the time BoBo is done and we get a Pacific release (really needs to be at least two to make it worthwhile) the engine will be close to the end of its useful life anyway. 

 

Better to put energy into sorting out BoX’s existing issues and continuing along the path it’s on, rather than overcomplicating it.  

[Gambit21]

Yep

 

[1./KG4_ArthurMimo]

On 8/18/2018 at 5:17 PM, sereme1 said:

With Korea there is one issue; only two planes are on the top of the food chain, Sabre and Mig-15. The rest is far inferior and can't compete.

 

Actually PO-2 is top of food chain. As we all know, PO-2 > F94. 

[Jabo_68*]

On 8/18/2018 at 5:53 PM, Voidhunger said:

We need Bf109g10, yak3, la7 so I expect another western/eastern scenario maybe simultaneosly developed with pto if there will be enough material. I think pto will take longer to create than bobp.

Battle of Berlin?

[Feathered_IV]

Battle near Berlin perhaps.  

Like Moscow, I don’t think you’d be able to fly over it.  So the map would look just like Bodenplatte for the most part.  

[Ehret]

37 minutes ago, Feathered_IV said:

Battle near Berlin perhaps.  

Like Moscow, I don’t think you’d be able to fly over it.  So the map would look just like Bodenplatte for the most part.  

 

If the Kingcobra would be available there I'd pre-order immediately...

[Herne]

Could you consider the Battle of Berlin a "Great Battle" ? surely LW airfields by this time were bombed to oblivion and any AC they could field were hopelessly outnumbered ?

[Bremspropeller]

2 hours ago, Ehret said:

 

If the Kingcobra would be available there I'd pre-order immediately...

 

Recent studies show that the P-63 didn't show up in frontline-units until after VE day.

1 hour ago, =FEW=Herne said:

Could you consider the Battle of Berlin a "Great Battle" ? surely LW airfields by this time were bombed to oblivion and any AC they could field were hopelessly outnumbered ?

 

Depends. Berlin wasn't so much a hunting-ground for the western allied fighters by that time, as they were more concerned about ground-support for their armies, which didn't come near Berlin. There would have been the occasional bomber-formation flying through the map-area, though.

It would mostly be an Eastern Front thing - very much depending on where the map was pointing. Probably east with the western edges between Strausberg and Hoppegarten or something of the likes.

[Sgt_Joch]

Rowan's Mig Alley was one of my favorite sims and I have read a lot on the Korean War. I would love to see a Korean War sim. 

 

[Jabo_68*]

10 hours ago, Feathered_IV said:

Battle near Berlin perhaps.  

Like Moscow, I don’t think you’d be able to fly over it.  So the map would look just like Bodenplatte for the most part.  

Yes.   The Battle of Seelow Heights for an example.

 

However,  wouldn't mind pounding panzers in the Falaise Gap with my Tiffie!

Edited August 25, 2018 by Jabo_68*
added more text