Jump to content
Novice-Flyer

Does IL-2 GB need to return to the Eastern Front?

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, Tony_Kito said:

 

Your tester colleague seems to disagree. 

 

 

 

Given time things could change - or things happening behind the scenes that were not aware of. If the world holds itself together long enough for us to be concerned with what theater a flight sim is covering in 10 years then we’re doing well I’d say regardless of the theater.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really couldn't care less where they go next, the quality of product they constantly deliver could make any theater worth buying and enjoying, putting the emphasis on combat is what makes this sim what it is. 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they should do BoB just so maybe people will finally stop confusing GB and CloD of being the same thing.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


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

I think they should do BoB just so maybe people will finally stop confusing GB and CloD of being the same thing.

Honestly I'd rather just have GB dominate the entire IL-2 brand rather than 2 offshoots cock blocking theaters from eachother.
No offence meant to the TF guys but I just have so much more fun with GB

  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, /top_lad/CaptainJack said:

Honestly I'd rather just have GB dominate the entire IL-2 brand rather than 2 offshoots cock blocking theaters from eachother.
No offence meant to the TF guys but I just have so much more fun with GB

 

Maybe they'll give CloD the ROF-treatment at one point in time in the future. Until then, there are other theaters they can look at:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, /top_lad/CaptainJack said:

Honestly I'd rather just have GB dominate the entire IL-2 brand rather than 2 offshoots cock blocking theaters from eachother.
No offence meant to the TF guys but I just have so much more fun with GB

 

It does seem strange that a failed 8 year old game and its ongoing fan project can dictate the available options for this series.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

COD is great.  I plan to fly it more. 8 years old you say. You could say the same with a lot of great games. 

For me GB is fun for 20 minutes cod for longer and DCS even longer. We are not the same. So do not be too quick to shut down a game. You might be where I am at in a short while. I flown GB since the start 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

I’d love to see CloD get shut down and have the GB dev team take over the MTO.

Nah, CloD should get assigned the Spanish Civil War in place of MTO.  End result would probably be the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never return to the Eastern Front! Flying to the end of the runway at tree top level to attack a convoy of 5 trucks with the same plane set does not ever need to be repeated.

The PTO would be would be far more diverse plane set and mission type.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Frequent_Flyer said:

Flying to the end of the runway at tree top level to attack a convoy of 5 trucks with the same plane set does not ever need to be repeated.

 

@Gambit21 would like to have a word with you. You are obviously, totally, and completely oblivious to what's been done with single-player gameplay over the last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Frequent_Flyer said:

Never return to the Eastern Front! Flying to the end of the runway at tree top level to attack a convoy of 5 trucks with the same plane set does not ever need to be repeated.

The PTO would be would be far more diverse plane set and mission type.

 

Well the franchise is off to the West with Bodenplatte and FC, so hopefully that should keep players busy for a while!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Frequent_Flyer said:

Never return to the Eastern Front! Flying to the end of the runway at tree top level to attack a convoy of 5 trucks with the same plane set does not ever need to be repeated.

The PTO would be would be far more diverse plane set and mission type.

PTO is not gåing to happen, I am going to spam that section until they answer. You cannot answer any post there. 

6 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

@Gambit21 would like to have a word with you. You are obviously, totally, and completely oblivious to what's been done with single-player gameplay over the last year.

Yes Ask Gambit, he tell you how many hours rubbish ai cost him. 

ME is better according to mission makers , AI got a long way left

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay guys, let’s end this whole thing about IL-2 Cliffs of Dover ending ASAP. What the issue appears to be is that there’s nothing wrong with CloD, it’s just there’s a strange belief amongst some people that Il-2 Great Battles must cover every battle that was fought in World War 2. Therefore people want Cliffs of Dover to end just so that the Battle of Britain, Atlantic, and Mediterranean can be a part of IL-2 Gb. First of all, this is never going to happen due to a result of many reasons regarding TFS and 1CGS.

        An important fact is that while people say that Jason and his team are struggling because they’re a small team and they work almost to the bone; the people at Team Fusion are in a worse state than the former. To begin with, the people there only work during their spare time due to their real jobs and personal/family reasons. Whenever you have the time to play IL-2 is when the people at TFS have time to work. TFS and 1CGS may work independently, but they communicate to each other on their future plans and maps.

         Saying that CloD needs to mothballed just so that 1C can remake whatever is in CloD is quite selfish and very immature. It’s like saying that there’s a Thrifty Foods and a Save-On Foods grocery store in the town you live in, and you and some townspeople want one of the 2 to shutdown and the remainder should expand just because some items are not sold at both stores.

 

         When Team Fusion and 1C signed the agreement and the former obtained the source code, this seemed like the right step and put the game on the right track of a bright future. Yet this seems to have angered some members of IL-2 GB. A fact is that in 2015, TF patch 5.0 was expected to be released in late 2016/early 2017. However, when the agreement was signed the plans for TF changed. There first goal was to release the game as Blitz and to make TF 5.0 a comprehensive, professionally developed product. There are 15 planes to be included in 5.0 that weren’t initially planned: P-40, Dewoitine D.520, Beaufighter, Macchi 202. The 2 games will probably have the same planes in some patches (Bf109E-G, P-40, Macchi 202, Spitfire, etc.) Imo, I like the devs of CoD better because they get their heads in the game more as their patches include pretty much every plane/ship that participated in each battle, while 1C will only cover 10 planes. For 5.0 the DKM Scharnhorst, Prinz Eugen, Admiral Scheer; HMS Renown, Warspite,etc. will be included. The German ships are “could have” if Operation Sealion was launched, and probably for Arctic/Atlantic/Norway in the future. For TF 6.0 there will probably be a mission where you can fly a Fairey Swordfish against the DKM Bismarck!

 

         As kids we would say “I... first”. e.g. “ I was here first!”. Cliffs of Dover was released in 2011, while BoS in late 2014. However, the current version was released in late 2017. This is how roughly everything is:

IL-2 Cliffs of Dover 2011-17= BoS Alpha

Il-2 Cliffs of Dover Blitz = BoS late 2014

TF 5.0 Tobruk = BOM

TF 6.0 Malta = BoK 

Note: Malta map will probably include Sicily and Tunisia to accurately portray the siege.

        VR will be in the game probably in the summer of 2019, it’s just the team doesn’t want to delay 5.0 just for VR

 

        After Malta, I see them covering Sicily, Tunisia, Operation Torch, Battle of France, D-Day, maybe much more. The reason why Jason probably doesn’t want to do D-Day is because he would have to make the map, planes, and ships. That would require a massive amount of effort. That is why he will probably let TFS do it because they have the map and all they will need to do is slightly update the map to 1944 and to make the planes/ships. Many people believe that if Team Fusion does the Med, then 1C can never do the Med. I don’t think that’s necessarily true as Jason stated that they just have to be cautious as they don’t want it to be a waste of time and money, nor do they want to cannibalize the other product. I see 1C doing the Battle of El Alamein for Tank Crew.

      

       A question is, “ In what other IL-2 game has clickable cockpits, flyable Vickers Wellington, Bf 108, D.520, BR.20, Bf110C-6 Gladiator, Spitfire Mk.I, Battle of Britain, you can man Flak Guns, drive vehicles, etc.?”

 

   IL-2 GB: “ In what other game has a very realistic damage model, planes/tanks with realistic cockpits, highly detailed maps, flyable Ju-52, large map of Western Europe, etc?”

      If someone can ask In what other game can you/has...? then the game is worth playing.

 

      The PTO was explored in 2004 and very few parts of the Mediterranean in IL-2 1946. That is why both teams want to go there. If the Pacific gets delayed, then I believe that Jason will just focus his efforts on FC and TC.

     

       One thing that will end about IL-2 Cliffs of Dover is it’s bugs and performance issues. It’s one thing to say that one will not play until VR and the issues are solved, but it’s another thing to say that the game should end and be redone in BoX

 

People’s thoughts that Cliffs of Dover should be mothballed is the true thing that needs to end.

 

As the creator of this thread, I Novice Flyer want this silly issue to end and let this thread be about anything that doesn’t have to do with Cliffs of Dover ending.

 

    FINAL COMMENT.

      

Edited by Novice-Flyer
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

@Gambit21 would like to have a word with you. You are obviously, totally, and completely oblivious to what's been done with single-player gameplay over the last year.

I went for the quick " No" , in reply if we need to get back to the East. I have no issues with the game play it is outstanding. The Eastern Front is  monumentally boring , neither airforce had the competence, equipment and therefore the capability to be anything but a tactical air-force. Essentially repeating the same mission over  and over again.  We do not need another chapter of this, we all have seen this movie enough times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Novice-Flyer said:

Okay guys, let’s end this whole thing about IL-2 Cliffs of Dover ending ASAP. What the issue appears to be is that there’s nothing wrong with CloD, it’s just there’s a strange belief amongst some people that Il-2 Great Battles must cover every battle that was fought in World War 2. Therefore people want Cliffs of Dover to end just so that the Battle of Britain, Atlantic, and Mediterranean can be a part of IL-2 Gb. First of all, this is never going to happen due to a result of many reasons regarding TFS and 1CGS.

       

 

How do you know that it's never going to happen?  I think the odds of TF failing are actually quite high.

47 minutes ago, Frequent_Flyer said:

I went for the quick " No" , in reply if we need to get back to the East. I have no issues with the game play it is outstanding. The Eastern Front is  monumentally boring , neither airforce had the competence, equipment and therefore the capability to be anything but a tactical air-force. Essentially repeating the same mission over  and over again.  We do not need another chapter of this, we all have seen this movie enough times.

 

I have bad news for you.  This game engine is designed for tactical combat situations.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does not need to return to ETO. Do I want it to, yes. But nothing that outreaches 1943. Especially if the team wants to make Collector Planes that comply with most of current GB maps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think the most realistic theaters for an next release could be the following:

 

 

Vistula-oder offensive/Berlin: Late war soviet aircraft and still possible to use 5 late war luftwaffe aircraft, setup could be like this:

Yak9U                                    Bf109 G10

La7                                         Fw190 A9

Tu2                                         Ju88S or Ar234

Il2 1944 or Il10                      Me410

Yak3                                      Ta152 (unsure how much it was used but could be an premium)

 

Normandy 1944 Tank Crew: Normandy landscape with it’s many hedgerows can be very fun for tank gameplay and an aircraft release is unlikely because of the lack of luftwaffe operations and lack of luftwaffe aircraft that haven't been made yet (aircraft could still be used on the map airfields like planned for kursk) an possible tank setup could be:

PzIV H                                   M4A1 (75 and 76mm)

Panther A                               Sherman V (75mm) and/or VC (17 pounder)

Tiger E                                   Churchill MkIV (75mm and 6pdr)

StugIII G                               M10 (76mm) and/or Archilles (17 pounder)

Marder III M                         M5A1 (37mm) and/or M8 Scott (75mm)

 

Okinawa/Kyushu: Late war usa/japanese aircraft, navy operations and not many japanese ships needed to be made compared to midway (making kyushu is probably going to be difficult though).

Late war japanese aircraft might also be better documented then the ones used from midway because more where captured/tested by the allies and more survived (like N1K2) compared to types from midway like d3a and b5n but I might be wrong here though.

Setup could be like this:

F4Uc/d                                   A6M5

F6F-5                                     N1K2

SB2C-3                                  P1Y (Had several nightfighter modifications so might be an better choice compared to ki67/g4m)

P47N                                      Ki84

B25                                        Ki100

 

Battle of Korea: Might be popular for the Mig15 vs F86 and other allied aircraft but an problem is lack of aircraft to be used together in the same timeframe with the mig15, if the entire war is made an setup could be:

Mig 15                                    F86

Il10                                         AD2

Tu2                                         A26

Yak9P                                    Sea Fury

La9                                         F9F

 

 

Battle of Britain: while unlikely because of the already released cliffs of dover/blitz it might be an sales opportunity for the 80's anniversary of the battle of britain in 2020, setup can be similar to aircraft used in clod.

Edited by ww2fighter20
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well said Novice...I just finished flying the stock RAF campaign in CLOD Blitz and had a good time...(Yes, the final mission was a bit..hmmm..done to death years ago that topic)...May both sims prosper and go forward...I may go back to BOM even if some one can point me to a good mission pack, campaign etc for that...

 

Happy New Year to all...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ww2fighter20 said:

Okinawa/Kyushu

Take a look at the map. Than take a look again. And maybe again.

Than count nautical miles between Okinawa and Kyushu.

 

 

Even if you would model Kyushu only with Kanoya Air Base it's still over 340 nm in a straight line. Map would be huge and mostly empty. Plenty of room for aircraft carriers ... save for the fact that Japan had no operational Air Groups capable of carrier operations and carriers were stuck in Kure and Sasebo. So our historical purists would not stand such possibility. Then you're left with U.S. Fleet than can do just fine (but not P-47N and B-25) and Japanese that EVERY time have to fly hundreds of miles. 

In reality Japanese fighters did not have range to conduct escort operations and combat past Amami-oshima. And not everyone fancies Drinkins style kamikaze flights.

Okinawa is not a viable nor well thought option. 

 

As for documentation for Japanese aircraft. Its totally the oposite. The aircraft present during Midway are far better researched and documented than lets say ... N1K2-J, Ki-84 or Ki-100. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

I went for the quick " No" , in reply if we need to get back to the East. I have no issues with the game play it is outstanding. The Eastern Front is  monumentally boring , neither airforce had the competence, equipment and therefore the capability to be anything but a tactical air-force. Essentially repeating the same mission over  and over again.  We do not need another chapter of this, we all have seen this movie enough times.

 

Bro, the whole game is modelled on tactical air combat. If you're expecting anything else, you are going to be sorely disappointed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, =362nd_FS=Hiromachi said:

Take a look at the map. Than take a look again. And maybe again.

Than count nautical miles between Okinawa and Kyushu.

 

 

Even if you would model Kyushu only with Kanoya Air Base it's still over 340 nm in a straight line. Map would be huge and mostly empty. Plenty of room for aircraft carriers ... save for the fact that Japan had no operational Air Groups capable of carrier operations and carriers were stuck in Kure and Sasebo. So our historical purists would not stand such possibility. Then you're left with U.S. Fleet than can do just fine (but not P-47N and B-25) and Japanese that EVERY time have to fly hundreds of miles. 

In reality Japanese fighters did not have range to conduct escort operations and combat past Amami-oshima. And not everyone fancies Drinkins style kamikaze flights.

Okinawa is not a viable nor well thought option. 

 

As for documentation for Japanese aircraft. Its totally the oposite. The aircraft present during Midway are far better researched and documented than lets say ... N1K2-J, Ki-84 or Ki-100. 

 

For distance you could possibly introduce something like an timeskip feature for singleplayer where at an certain point of the map over sea you are given the choice to fast forward or respawn at the other side, this way players have an option of flying the entire trip or skip to see action sooner, for multiplayer this is more difficult though.

 

For multiplayer an idea would be to add an border where you automatically are respawned at the other side or turned back when you don't have enough fuel, for example you take off in an b25 from okinawa reach the borderline near okinawa in the direction of Kyushu and respawn at the other end near Kyushu, this might even be possible to work where okinawa and kyushu are 2 seperate maps.

This could also extend the range for other theaters of war in the future or could even introduce heavy bombers but in the end these are just some idea's for the future.

 

With Okinawa/Kyushu I was more thinking along the line of making most or an large part of kyushu so the operations and defence over there can also be included but I understand it might be difficuilt to make kyushu.

 

And for documentation well I did state I might be wrong, I just mentioned it since unlike the b5n and d3a there actually are preserved models still in existence along with the usa having tested it after the war where it's possible they made enough documents about them but if as you say there is little data or maybe even aren't allowed to acces them or unable to translate then I am wrong about there possible being more data available.

Edited by ww2fighter20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ww2fighter20 said:

 

 

Normandy 1944 Tank Crew: Normandy landscape with it’s many hedgerows can be very fun for tank gameplay and an aircraft release is unlikely because of the lack of luftwaffe operations and lack of luftwaffe aircraft that haven't been made yet (aircraft could still be used on the map airfields like planned for kursk) an possible tank setup could be:

PzIV H                                   M4A1 (75 and 76mm)

Panther A                               Sherman V (75mm) and/or VC (17 pounder)

Tiger E                                   Churchill MkIV (75mm and 6pdr)

StugIII G                               M10 (76mm) and/or Archilles (17 pounder)

Marder III M                         M5A1 (37mm) and/or M8 Scott (75mm)

 


Some corrections, M4A1 with the 76mm were only ever fitted on large hatch M4A1s. No large hatch A1s had the 75 mm (unless you count the DD Swimming Tanks which were based off large hatch M4A1s). I personally believe the Churchill Mk VII is more appropriate for Normandy as well considering it first saw action there. I would also replace the M5 Stuart with the Cromwell. Unless TC becomes far more in depth (i.e. infantry), light tanks don't really have a place.

 

I would also replace the Tiger E (which can really be represented by ingame mod of current ingame Tiger) with the Tiger II with early turret which took part in Normandy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Novice-Flyer said:

         Saying that CloD needs to mothballed just so that 1C can remake whatever is in CloD is quite selfish and very immature. It’s like saying that there’s a Thrifty Foods and a Save-On Foods grocery store in the town you live in, and you and some townspeople want one of the 2 to shutdown and the remainder should expand just because some items are not sold at both stores.

To me, its not silly to want to see the current generation of IL-2 fill as many theaters of war as possible. If the reality was that CloD did not influence the decisions that BoX takes then people would not be concerned with the topic. The concern is that CloD does not have the lifespan left, development speed, or technological advances that BOX does yet influences future directions of the projects. I own both, I enjoy only BoX. Nuff said about that I suppose.

 

If all assets from CloD could be ported to IL-2 GB in a similar fashion to flying circus and the TF people continue development on the GB platform I would be incredibly happy. But thats obviously not possibly as they had concerns over if even flying circus was possible. I seriously doubt CloD is even remotely compatible outside of dated 3D models to import. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as the core gameplay experience gets a really good kick up the arse, I honestly don't mind what theatre comes next.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, ww2fighter20 said:

 

For distance you could possibly introduce something like an timeskip feature for singleplayer where at an certain point of the map over sea you are given the choice to fast forward or respawn at the other side, this way players have an option of flying the entire trip or skip to see action sooner, for multiplayer this is more difficult though.

 

For multiplayer an idea would be to add an border where you automatically are respawned at the other side or turned back when you don't have enough fuel, for example you take off in an b25 from okinawa reach the borderline near okinawa in the direction of Kyushu and respawn at the other end near Kyushu, this might even be possible to work where okinawa and kyushu are 2 seperate maps.

This could also extend the range for other theaters of war in the future or could even introduce heavy bombers but in the end these are just some idea's for the future.

 

With Okinawa/Kyushu I was more thinking along the line of making most or an large part of kyushu so the operations and defence over there can also be included but I understand it might be difficuilt to make kyushu.

 

And for documentation well I did state I might be wrong, I just mentioned it since unlike the b5n and d3a there actually are preserved models still in existence along with the usa having tested it after the war where it's possible they made enough documents about them but if as you say there is little data or maybe even aren't allowed to acces them or unable to translate then I am wrong about there possible being more data available.

We already have features to spawn closer to target and to increase rate at which time is passing. But it always dumbs down the experience. 

 

As for multiplayer. With the way engine currently works I dont see that. Besides, what you suggest is just a sort of portal to spawn you only near targets. Again, this dumbs down the exprience and misses the point. Pick more realistic ideas, there are plenty of campaigns and areas in the Pacific to choose, avoiding long travel over the ocean. 

 

U.S. did not test most of this aircraft the way you think. They were looking for interesting technologies they may incorporate into their own designs and to compare general characteristics of this warbirds. There are more detailed reports on Japanese radio guided air to surface bomb/missile, Ne-20 jet engine and stuff like that. There are some general tests of Ki-84, but nothing detailed. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, ww2fighter20 said:

 

For distance you could possibly introduce something like an timeskip feature for singleplayer where at an certain point of the map over sea you are given the choice to fast forward or respawn at the other side, this way players have an option of flying the entire trip or skip to see action sooner, for multiplayer this is more difficult though.

 

For multiplayer an idea would be to add an border where you automatically are respawned at the other side or turned back when you don't have enough fuel, for example you take off in an b25 from okinawa reach the borderline near okinawa in the direction of Kyushu and respawn at the other end near Kyushu, this might even be possible to work where okinawa and kyushu are 2 seperate maps.

This could also extend the range for other theaters of war in the future or could even introduce heavy bombers but in the end these are just some idea's for the future.

 

With Okinawa/Kyushu I was more thinking along the line of making most or an large part of kyushu so the operations and defence over there can also be included but I understand it might be difficuilt to make kyushu.

 

And for documentation well I did state I might be wrong, I just mentioned it since unlike the b5n and d3a there actually are preserved models still in existence along with the usa having tested it after the war where it's possible they made enough documents about them but if as you say there is little data or maybe even aren't allowed to acces them or unable to translate then I am wrong about there possible being more data available.

 

In some way I understand your passion and hope for Pacific being done - but time skip / respawn points for not to say time gates? Are you serious? Do you imagine all those

experts in our row ranting about every single missing rivet on a spar that we don't even ever get to see and you propose them a Pacific War Theater with enter and exit spawn

points? They will all nail you on the wall upside down!

 

As Hiromachi already indicated - there are a lot of hot spots where distances are negligible at some degree - f.ex. the Solomon islands just to mention one.

Edited by -IRRE-Therion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd not say Solomon Islands have negligible distances. At least if one thinks of Guadalcanal Campaign in 1942. However 1943 campaign over New Georgia islands and Bougainville is doable. Another options - Burma 1941 - 1944, Philippines - 1944, New Guinea - 1942 - 1944 and China. But at this point Im not sure if PTO can even be recreated in a reasonable manner, seeing how engine crumbles under current changes. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

I'd not say Solomon Islands have negligible distances. At least if one thinks of Guadalcanal Campaign in 1942. However 1943 campaign over New Georgia islands and Bougainville is doable. Another options - Burma 1941 - 1944, Philippines - 1944, New Guinea - 1942 - 1944 and China. But at this point Im not sure if PTO can even be recreated in a reasonable manner, seeing how engine crumbles under current changes. 

 

I didn't mentioned the Solomon Islands because of the distances but for the timeline sake. The battle or operations on this area lasted almost a year (Feb - Dec 1943).

And the distance from south to north of all the islands is about approximately 600 miles, so the distances are not negligible, yes, but absolutely doable.

 

But you are right, there are other options too to consider. Anyway, PTO must not necessarily take place in the vast and endless pacific ocean only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, =362nd_FS=Hiromachi said:

But at this point Im not sure if PTO can even be recreated in a reasonable manner, seeing how engine crumbles under current changes. 

No matter what theatre goes next those engine limitations should be on devs schedule to improve at some point.

It's welcome for overall il2 experience regardless of theatre.

I think it's worth prolonging development for another 6-12 months or what ever it takes to make those engine improvements, il2:GB in general will have benefit of it recreating epic battles and PTO alone could ensure financial income boost and playerbase expansion like none theatre did so far.

Preorders and some collector stuff released in the meantime could help trought that period.

 

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/31/2018 at 9:00 PM, LukeFF said:

 

Bro, the whole game is modelled on tactical air combat. If you're expecting anything else, you are going to be sorely disappointed. 

We certainly do not need to see the same monotonous  109,190, Yak La-5 escorting the same twin and single engine  attack aircraft, attacking a convoy of vehicles over a five year span of history, The PTO has a much more diverse plane set than the other theaters, allowing the corresponding diversity in mission type.If developers did the PTO from start to finish it offers a much more interesting and challenging game play than the East. The axis fans will have a wider variety of aircraft .

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On ‎1‎/‎1‎/‎2019 at 7:11 PM, EAF_Ribbon said:

No matter what theatre goes next those engine limitations should be on devs schedule to improve at some Point.

 

If they aren´t they go out of business in five years latest. So my guess is, they are already working on it.

Edited by sevenless

Share this post


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

We certainly do not need to see the same monotonous  109,190, Yak La-5 escorting the same twin and single engine  attack aircraft, attacking a convoy of vehicles over a five year span of history, The PTO has a much more diverse plane set than the other theaters, allowing the corresponding diversity in mission type.If developers did the PTO from start to finish it offers a much more interesting and challenging game play than the East. The axis fans will have a wider variety of aircraft .

 

While I very much want to go to the Pacific as well, I find the Eastern front reasonably diverse and not particularly monotonous. Though there is plenty of overlap of aircraft types (gustav, gustav, gustav/anton anton anton) there are enough differences between even those airframes to make mastering them interesting. Not to mention the difference between bombers, attackers and fighters to keep one busy for years. I don't see the Pacific mission profiles being all that different other than the targets being largely seaborne and the landings requiring more precision. The scenery should be amazing though. I do argue for different theaters regularly but that's mostly because I'm greedy and enjoy this teams efforts greatly.  :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sevenless said:

 

If they aren´t they go out of business in five years latest. So my guess is, they are already working on it.

Il2 brand is to strong to go out of business, but to achieve greater popularity and form a new younger generations of flight simmers it would help to improve game engine that it can sustain greater battles (number of planes at one spot).

I don't know are they already working on it, i doubt since they are small team working on 3 titles at once.

I hope BoBp will bring succes and PTO will be next, i wish them all the money on this world so they can expand team/manpower .

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, more Eastern Front would be a massive disappointment. For me, the world in which we fly is the biggest draw.

 

I grew up in a part of Canada that resembles equal parts Moscow map and Stalingrad map - and I find that terrain staggeringly boring - even though expertly rendered in game (or maybe because it is rendered so well in game 😁). Perhaps the only thing worse is the patchwork tabletop of the low countries of western Europe  ☹️.

 

Kuban by contrast is beautiful with elevation, water, and different terrain types on the same map - by far the best map in game at the moment and an absolute joy to simply fly around in. And Kuban makes it easy to see how wonderful it would be to fly in a map filled with jungle islands and sparkling blue water, or Korean mountains, islands, and coast.

 

 

Share this post


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

Il2 brand is to strong to go out of business, but to achieve greater popularity and form a new younger generations of flight simmers it would help to improve game engine that it can sustain greater battles (number of planes at one spot).

 

Don´t underestimate the force of the market. Once there is a product which offers features like 1946 does, combined with VR and up to date graphics they inevitably will run into commercial problems. The brand will not help them then.

 

Fortunately I don´t think this risk scenario will take place, but they need, and I think they are, aware of it.

Share this post


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

 

Don´t underestimate the force of the market. Once there is a product which offers features like 1946 does, combined with VR and up to date graphics they inevitably will run into commercial problems. The brand will not help them then.

 

Fortunately I don´t think this risk scenario will take place, but they need, and I think they are, aware of it.

As a customer; i can only wish someone does 1946 content wise and with fidelity of BoX.......that girl would win my heart!

 

No matter who ever that will be, but i think BoX is on the good way to reach 1946 fame.....PTO will be huge step toward it, variety will be achieved, new tech on the table so other theatres will be developed faster.

Also almost in every update devs introduce improvements in all areas of the game and that is very promising.

In few months as BoBp getting closer to release i hope Jason will suprise us with some kind of announcement.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


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

As a customer; i can only wish someone does 1946 content wise and with fidelity of BoX

This.

I hope we will eventually get all WWII and pre-WWII theaters in this wonderful game, including Battle of Britain. By the way, it's not the theater that makes the game interesting or boring. It's the actual gameplay and variety of missions. I'm not talking about MP, but the SP. We need more mission types in the career.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Pudu said:

Personally, more Eastern Front would be a massive disappointment. For me, the world in which we fly is the biggest draw.

 

I grew up in a part of Canada that resembles equal parts Moscow map and Stalingrad map - and I find that terrain staggeringly boring - even though expertly rendered in game (or maybe because it is rendered so well in game 😁). Perhaps the only thing worse is the patchwork tabletop of the low countries of western Europe  ☹️.

 

Kuban by contrast is beautiful with elevation, water, and different terrain types on the same map - by far the best map in game at the moment and an absolute joy to simply fly around in. And Kuban makes it easy to see how wonderful it would be to fly in a map filled with jungle islands and sparkling blue water, or Korean mountains, islands, and coast.

 

 

 

More elevation and variation and close to sea :)

 

 

 

 

fixedw_large_4x.jpg

 

The-Apennines-Italy.jpg

Edited by 77.CountZero
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...