Jump to content
Novice-Flyer

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

Recommended Posts

I like it but I wonder would it be a tank and plane module or separate modules of the same thing but one for planes and one for tanks? 

 

We should definitely finish the eastern front some day. I feel like I've stepped in the middle of a movie and can't stay for the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, -IRRE-Therion said:

 

Exactly - well said.

 

Last time I checked it’s been doing both.

Hint - you need revenue to continue to pay people, thus continuing to improve the product.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

I like it but I wonder would it be a tank and plane module or separate modules of the same thing but one for planes and one for tanks? 

 

We should definitely finish the eastern front some day. I feel like I've stepped in the middle of a movie and can't stay for the end.

 

 

 

Or something like that, or the opposite of that, or something...😀

 

Seperate modules for the same thing, fully integrated.  You would get the same map if you bought either one, but to get full function from the Tanks you would need Tank Crew, which obviously wouldn't come with any new planes.  Planes and tanks would all operate on the same, expanded map.  eh...now I'm starting to confuse myself, it's really late!

Edited by SeaSerpent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, LuseKofte said:

I truly believe this sim will be much better if it got improved more than expand.  

 

It's very hard to complete the foundations when you've already called in the decorators.

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main thing that is missing from Eastern Front is the northern part. Once Finnish Virtualpilots finish the Karelian map, then I am quite satisfied. Most of the planes that we have from Moscow-Stalingrad-Kuban fit in there and if we get Brewster Buffalo also (from Battle of Midway?) then the plane set is reasonably well covered. 

Other than that I am more interested in seeing more depth in the game rather than getting more and more new fighters, which I understand is a priority for many players. Will be interesting to see what the Air Marshal mode will bring or now that Pat Wilson has expanded his work to coop-missions - maybe that could develop eventually into something similar to SEOW in the old Il-2 1946. I am personally more interested in an early- to mid-war air war simulation rather than dog fighting in fancy late-war fighters.

Edited by II./JG77_Kemp
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, II./JG77_Kemp said:

The main thing that is missing from Eastern Front is the northern part. Once Finnish Virtualpilots finish the Karelian map, then I am quite satisfied. Most of the planes that we have from Moscow-Stalingrad-Kuban fit in there and if we get Brewster Buffalo also (from Battle of Midway?) then the plane set is reasonably well covered. 

Other than that I am more interested in seeing more depth in the game rather than getting more and more new fighters, which I understand is a priority for many players. Will be interesting to see what the Air Marshal mode will bring or now that Pat Wilson has expanded his work to coop-missions - maybe that could develop eventually into something similar to SEOW in the old Il-2 1946. I am personally more interested in an early- to mid-war air war simulation rather than dog fighting in fancy late-war fighters.

 

Unfortunately the Buffalos used by FiAF, KNIL, RAF and USN are all slightly different. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no need to do whole dlc, just sell collectable yak-9u and tu-2s and for onlline its more then enought :)  existing maps can be used as pretend fronts as long as airplanes are in game not many will care about land they fly them over.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

I'm already suspecting that some people are going to tell me what a stupid idea but...

 

We are getting Tank Crew-Clash at Prokhorovka.  I thought I read that this will include a 100k x 100k map.  Well, what if they made that map somewhat bigger to make it more conducive to air operations(as big as other maps in BoX) and threw in maybe 2 or 3 new 1943 airplanes, and created "Il-2: Battle of Kursk".  It would be a bit more Eastern Front, which a lot of people don't want to see new efforts directed towards, but it would have significant overlap with Tank Crew already being developed, and wouldn't need to have the normal allotment of new planes that a typical module has because we already have a lot of the major planes that were there.   So in that sense,  if they were inclined to go back to the Eastern Front, they could make a genuine BoX module with less work required than usual BoX modules, and it wouldn't have to retail at the usual cost either.  Tank Crew would just operate on the same map.  Dumb idea?

 

 

 

Not dumb, but quite possibly not as easy as one might think.  The Tank Battles map is going to be far more detailed than the air maps.  If you expand on a map with that detail level then I'm not sure how much effort goes in or what the impact is on performance for flying.  There is also the fact that the two are being built by different teams.  Right now there is minimal cross team coordination required.  Make it a ground/air war and now you have to align two distinct teams.

 

If I was doing it I would start by making tank battles as is, then try flying some planes on the map to verify performance.  Then assign a team to integrate air combat into Tank Battles.  By that time you are well into 2019 and maybe 2020.  If I was a tank guy I'm not so sure how keen I would be to suddenly become a target :).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like a early eastern front expansion with older planes like an early Stuka, Yak, Lagg etc.. Bagration would be nice, but there would hardly be any new planes for the axis. Making it difficult to put in the standard format. 

 

Grt M 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, 77.CountZero said:

no need to do whole dlc, just sell collectable yak-9u and tu-2s and for onlline its more then enought :)  existing maps can be used as pretend fronts as long as airplanes are in game not many will care about land they fly them over.

 

The large majority of the player base never go online.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

 

Last time I checked it’s been doing both.

Hint - you need revenue to continue to pay people, thus continuing to improve the product.

 

Well, well, well Mr. Gambit,

 

thank you for your hint - but, you know, we are not that naive to think all is for free and revenue doesn't matter. And yes, you are

right - this time they not only provided some new content and features with the last update. But still, there is a lot to fix...

 

I'm a great fan of this series and I really hope they keep going and have a lot of success - that said, I just want to tell you that

I really support them already as I purchased every single bit of them and even some bits twice or triple just to make someone

happy here who cannot afford it.

 

And if I loose my temper again (sorry for that), criticize or even "rant" a little bit about some issues, I do it here and so it stays

in the family, because all of us know what we are talking about (more or less). That said, I really hope other people out there

don't write bad reviews about this great series (through Steam etc.), because they don't know this great community here and

don't have the same background like a lot of us.

 

So, in the meantime, I wish you a very nice day and - here it comes, Gambit - I really can't wait for your campaign and my

wallet is ready for that.

 

Cheerio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Finkeren said:

 

The large majority of the player base never go online.

 

then there is no point in making late vvs airplanes as collectables, as sp guys would have no where to play them, so then only option is late war vvs dlc :)

ps

just check on WoL and there is 26164 differant players that played there, thats not small number onliners, dont think theres mutch more offliners then that number :)

Edited by 77.CountZero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like the option to play a "fantasy" campaign where I can choose any plane in any theatre.

 

that would help mix thing up a bit!

 

then I could plug in any plane set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, 77.CountZero said:

 

then there is no point in making late vvs airplanes as collectables, as sp guys would have no where to play them, so then only option is late war vvs dlc :)

ps

just check on WoL and there is 26164 differant players that played there, thats not small number onliners, dont think theres mutch more offliners then that number :)

 

In the live chat on November 18 last year, Jason said that singleplayers are 90% of the customer base.

Share this post


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

 

In the live chat on November 18 last year, Jason said that singleplayers are 90% of the customer base.

 

I don't doubt that at all.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love the Winter War. It'd offer some new, fun planes like the Tupolev TB-3, Polikarpov I-15 and I-153, Tupolev SB-2M, Bristol Blenheim, M.S. 406, Brewster Buffalo, Gloster Gladiator... Would be awesome. The collector's Po-2 also fits the scenario perfectly.

 

Sure, it might be an odd scenario since Finland had extremely few planes, but it'd be a really fun setup.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Inkompetent said:

I'd love the Winter War. It'd offer some new, fun planes like the Tupolev TB-3, Polikarpov I-15 and I-153, Tupolev SB-2M, Bristol Blenheim, M.S. 406, Brewster Buffalo, Gloster Gladiator... Would be awesome. The collector's Po-2 also fits the scenario perfectly.

 

Sure, it might be an odd scenario since Finland had extremely few planes, but it'd be a really fun setup.

 

The Winter War would be an odd choice indeed, and it would not involve half the planes on your list. 

 

A 1941-42 Continuation War scenario would be better, since it would still give us a chance to see some of the older Soviet designs while also giving the Finns some more compettitive aircraft. It would also throw the Luftwaffe into the mix, thereby solving the problem of the FiAF being rather small in numbers.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

 

In the live chat on November 18 last year, Jason said that singleplayers are 90% of the customer base.

 

numbers show me that thats not true, if all registered on forum have game (and thats hard to belive) its stil not 90% when you see how many people play online, 60-70% maybe 90 for sure not, but people can belive what ever they wont to belive 😄

Edited by 77.CountZero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 77.CountZero said:

 

numbers show me that thats not true, if all registered on forum have game (and thats hard to belive) its stil not 90% when you see how many people play online, 60-70% maybe 90 for sure not, but people can belive what ever they wont to belive 😄

 

The number of 26164 you quoted is just the total number of players that have ever logged into WoL even once. Only a tiny, tiny minority of those are regular players on WoL, and as you can plainly see on the server lists, they have not flocked out to populate the couple dozen other servers that are available. 

 

We can trust Jason pretty well on the 90% figure, because he actually knows. Since this sim has connectivity requirements, the devs actually know how many people are playing and what they are playing at any given time. The only way to avoid that is to play in offline mode, which offers only SP content, so if anything the 90% is actually too low.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More Eastern Front air combat is fine in my eyes, seeing as the bulk of the war was fought in Russia. The fan-made Karelia map looks interesting, and to be honest BoX has no representation of the air war in northern Russia.

 

That being said, I wouldn't mind BoX doing more early war stuff. 1939, 1940, pre-Barbarossa 1941. A Battle of Malta, or Battle of France expansion to give us some more early war toys would be grand.

 

My dream would be to eventually have a sim where I could make a pilot and have a grand career that stretches from 1939 to 1945, going day by day (or there-abouts) - assuming the poor bastard lives the whole way through!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is everybody so keen on Midway?

 

1) It's a battle that lasted a couple of hours and was mainly fought over the ocean.

2) All Most airplanes are crap-planes (TM) that nobody outside of the die-hard nerds do care for*

3) It requires whizzing around with carriers.

 

Not that I'm against all the above - it's just that I don't see much business in such a battlefield.

It would make a nice add-on later, but as a boot in the door for several Pacific-franchises, I'm sorry. It won't cut it.

 

Why not start the Pacific with a more reasonable approach and go New Guinea or Guadalcanal/ The Solomons first?

NG has lots of nice landscape and more appealing airplanes for the masses. The same is true for Guadalcanal (or a "Solomon Map"), plus you get more naval aircraft.

 

___

* Unless you're flying a Zero.

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve typed post after post about the Solomons. I won’t repeat it here yet again.

 

At this point I’m in wait and see mode.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

Why not start the Pacific with a more reasonable approach and go New Guinea or Guadalcanal/ The Solomons first?

Good idea.

 

Have a nice day.

 

:salute:

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Why is everybody so keen on Midway?

 

1) It's a battle that lasted a couple of hours and was mainly fought over the ocean.

2) All Most airplanes are crap-planes (TM) that nobody outside of the die-hard nerds do care for*

3) It requires whizzing around with carriers.

 

Not that I'm against all the above - it's just that I don't see much business in such a battlefield.

It would make a nice add-on later, but as a boot in the door for several Pacific-franchises, I'm sorry. It won't cut it.

 

Why not start the Pacific with a more reasonable approach and go New Guinea or Guadalcanal/ The Solomons first?

NG has lots of nice landscape and more appealing airplanes for the masses. The same is true for Guadalcanal (or a "Solomon Map"), plus you get more naval aircraft.

 

___

* Unless you're flying a Zero.

1943-44 New Guinea would be nice imo and would allow us to use some of the Bodenplatte aircraft as well. New Guinea lasted almost the whole Pacific war and has alot of potential for multiple timeframes and planesets.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, the Pacific has the unique problem of being mainly "here is the island being invaded for the next few months," and almost all of these islands aren't terribly large.*

 

I could swear I remember hearing somewhere that 1C's work on the eventual Pacific module included making a generic ocean map as well as some island, but I can't remember and may be mixing up BoX with 1946/Forgotten Battles.

 

*There are, of course, exceptions, but Iwo Jima and Okinawa come readily to mind. Guadacanal in of itself isn't very big, but as part of the larger Solomon Islands it becomes a relatively big playing field. The same could be said of a few other areas, such as the Philippines and the Tarawa Atoll.

Edited by FarflungWanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

Why is everybody so keen on Midway?

 

1) It's a battle that lasted a couple of hours and was mainly fought over the ocean.

2) All Most airplanes are crap-planes (TM) that nobody outside of the die-hard nerds do care for*

3) It requires whizzing around with carriers.

 

Not that I'm against all the above - it's just that I don't see much business in such a battlefield.

It would make a nice add-on later, but as a boot in the door for several Pacific-franchises, I'm sorry. It won't cut it.

 

Why not start the Pacific with a more reasonable approach and go New Guinea or Guadalcanal/ The Solomons first?

NG has lots of nice landscape and more appealing airplanes for the masses. The same is true for Guadalcanal (or a "Solomon Map"), plus you get more naval aircraft.

 

___

* Unless you're flying a Zero.

 

I’d say quite the opposite. The planesets are pretty well matched. You just have to fly each aircraft to its strengths (*unless it’s a zero). A lot of Wildcat drivers, however, are going to perish until they learn energy management and teamwork.

 

The advantage to Midway (*APH) is not a lot of landmass and the ability to build technology (capital ships/carriers/fire control/arrested landings and elevators/boat AI/etc) for the rest of the theater. It makes the most sense for the Devs and should be fun for users as well. I’ve advocated heavily for And Pearl Harbor (*APH) elsewhere so I won’t rehash the whole thing here.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see your point, HerrMuff. Midway is certainly a good testing ground for carrier technology.

 

I don't envy the players who decide to fly Devastators, though...

Edited by FarflungWanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technology demonstrator to a certain extent but, done well, gameplay should still live up to expectations for this team. You can be sure Midway won’t be the only Island/Map provided.

 

The bombers and torpedo bombers will often suffer mightily on both sides as they frequently did in real life..

 

tactics tactics tactics

 

On the other hand, sinking a Yorktown or Akagi would be thrilling in the extreme when they pull it off. As a multiplayer guy, it should be worth a buttload of points too.

 

To remain tangential on topic, “In a word, no. ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the moment, after BoB Pacific theater should be great change. But, I hope to see air campaign/career on tank crew maps: Kursk is not only a great ground battle, it's also a great air battle, and of course, I hope to as a second Tank Crew game, Tank Crew : Battle of Normandy. One of the biggest battle and important battle of WW2, with a lots ground change compare to Clash at Prokhorovka, but it should be "easy" to make. Ground forces, like trucks, tanks, AAA, etc will be here thank's to Battle of Bodenplatte, and plane will be here too thank's to the same game. They can clearly make great stuff when improving relations between tank crew and IL-2.

 

Tank Crew: Battle of Normandy should this tank list:

American M4A3 with 75mm

American M4A1 with 76mm

American M10 with 3-inches

American M5

British M4 or M4 Composite/hybrid with 75mm

British M4A4 Sherman VC 17 pounder

British Cromwell with 6 pounder

British Achilles with 17 pounder

British Churchill Mk VII with 75mm

German Panzer 4 H

German Panzer V ausf A Panther

German Panzer VI ausf E Tiger

German Sd.Kfz 234/2 Puma

German StuG III ausf G

German Jagdpanzer V Jagdpanther

German Panzer VII Tiger II

 

One cool feature is that british and americans used the same vehicles, and also gave them to their allied: France, Poland, Canada, Belgium etc, so development and use of allied vehicle should be easy.

 

One other feature is that its should be easy to put modification: for example, M10 Tank destroyer was used by american and british, british also make rearm version with a 17 pounder gun, so with a modification "Achilles" we can reduce amount of vehicle. Same for sherman, we can make M4A3, M4A1, M4A4 and create  76mm gun turret or 17 pounder firefly modification. We can make the same with Cromwell and Churchill wich used a lot of different weapons, 90mm Close Support, 6 pounder, 75mm, 290mm AVRE, etc...

 

In the same time they should add some other plane, for examples for Kursk, maybe YaK 9, even if it is not one of the best soviet plane, but too early for YaK 3. Same for Battle for Normandy, they can add B26 Marauder, Typhoon, Arado. They can also add DC3 Douglas for paradrop and transport, Short Stirling for bombing, transport and paradrop and why not even add Glider to the game. For example you take your DC3, add the modification "Glider", and and the IA or a player, like bomber machine gunner, will go to glider plane and pilot it.

 

Edited by FR=Rookie=kgb613

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Battle of Normandy would be excellent. However, I can't remember whether or not 1C has stated infantry will be simulated, even in rudimentary fashion, for Tank Crew, and if not that's a problem. This isn't World of Tanks or War Thunder - armor was designed to support infantry (and defeat the armor supporting the other side's infantry!). Removing them from the context of the ground war as fought - and won - by the PBI would be a huge mistake.

 

They could be simple 2D sprites like in Panzer Elite if need be. But they can't be ignored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, FR=Rookie=kgb613 said:

For the moment, after BoB Pacific theater should be great change. But, I hope to see air campaign/career on tank crew maps: Kursk is not only a great ground battle, it's also a great air battle, and of course, I hope to as a second Tank Crew game, Tank Crew : Battle of Normandy. One of the biggest battle and important battle of WW2, with a lots ground change compare to Clash at Prokhorovka, but it should be "easy" to make. Ground forces, like trucks, tanks, AAA, etc will be here thank's to Battle of Bodenplatte, and plane will be here too thank's to the same game. They can clearly make great stuff when improving relations between tank crew and IL-2.

 

Tank Crew: Battle of Normandy should this tank list:

American M4A3 with 75mm

American M4A1 with 76mm

American M10 with 3-inches

American M5

British M4 or M4 Composite/hybrid with 75mm

British M4A4 Sherman VC 17 pounder

British Cromwell with 6 pounder

British Achilles with 17 pounder

British Churchill Mk VII with 75mm

German Panzer 4 H

German Panzer V ausf A Panther

German Panzer VI ausf E Tiger

German Sd.Kfz 234/2 Puma

German StuG III ausf G

German Jagdpanzer V Jagdpanther

German Panzer VII Tiger II

 

One cool feature is that british and americans used the same vehicles, and also gave them to their allied: France, Poland, Canada, Belgium etc, so development and use of allied vehicle should be easy.

 

One other feature is that its should be easy to put modification: for example, M10 Tank destroyer was used by american and british, british also make rearm version with a 17 pounder gun, so with a modification "Achilles" we can reduce amount of vehicle. Same for sherman, we can make M4A3, M4A1, M4A4 and create  76mm gun turret or 17 pounder firefly modification. We can make the same with Cromwell and Churchill wich used a lot of different weapons, 90mm Close Support, 6 pounder, 75mm, 290mm AVRE, etc...

 

In the same time they should add some other plane, for examples for Kursk, maybe YaK 9, even if it is not one of the best soviet plane, but too early for YaK 3. Same for Battle for Normandy, they can add B26 Marauder, Typhoon, Arado. They can also add DC3 Douglas for paradrop and transport, Short Stirling for bombing, transport and paradrop and why not even add Glider to the game. For example you take your DC3, add the modification "Glider", and and the IA or a player, like bomber machine gunner, will go to glider plane and pilot it.

 

I hadn’t given it much thought until now but wouldn’t a Battle of the Bulge make more sense for Tank Crew than Normandy considering the upcoming  planeset with Bodenplatte?

Edited by II/JG17_HerrMurf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, FarflungWanderer said:

I can see your point, HerrMuff. Midway is certainly a good testing ground for carrier technology.

 

I don't envy the players who decide to fly Devastators, though...

Devastators are what I plan to fly alot. They get a bad rap that they really don't deserve imo, yes they were outdated but there were alot of problems during midway that led to the extreme losses.

 

Avengers wouldn't have done much better.

Edited by Legioneod
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

Devastators are what I plan to fly alot. They get a bad rap that they really don't deserve imo, yes they were outdated but there were alot of problems during midway that led to the extreme losses.

 

Avengers wouldn't have done much better.

 

Excellent point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, FR=Rookie=kgb613 said:

hope to as a second Tank Crew game, Tank Crew : Battle of Normandy.

Great idea for a Tank Crew😀. I think the title should be Battle of Falaise because Falaise was where the major tank battle took place.

Share this post


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

Why is everybody so keen on Midway?.

 

"Midway" is really shorthand for 1942. With a plain ocean map 200x200km, you could re-create all the 1942 CV vs CV battles: Coral Sea, Midway, Eastern Solomons, Santa Cruz, Naval battle of Guadalcanal.

 

A Solomons map would be great, but if you want to include both the 'canal and Rabaul, you are looking at a 1000+km x1000+ km map. The biggest maps in Box are currently 400km x300 km. The flying times are the biggest problem that I could foresee. For most of the Guadalcanal Campaign IJN planes had to fly from Rabaul which was as I recall 6-9 hours round trip and they could not stay over Guadalcanal for more than 15 minutes to have enough fuel to make it back home. 

Edited by Sgt_Joch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

On the other hand, sinking a Yorktown or Akagi would be thrilling in the extreme

Over and over and over , again. Because, that's all you'd be able to do with Midway. Wildcat and Zeke a fair match. Uh....no. I'm with Gambit (I think we've been here several times, already) on New Guinea. Have said it elsewhere, many time. More options. More planes. Want carriers? Coral Sea was fought nearby. Same planes as Midway, pretty much. Land based airplanes for more varied scenarios. And the place is huge! Not some dinky atoll like Midway. And with a varied landmass not unlike the Kuban map. Beaches, jungles, mountains. Has everything you'd want for a Pacific War campaign. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...