Jump to content
Novice-Flyer

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

Recommended Posts

The Solomons map would have the distances scaled I’m sure to make it plausible both from a playability standpoint as well as a game engine standpoint.

Share this post


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

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. 

 

That's a good point, but I could see a semi-historical setup for dogfight-servers and airstarts for offline-campaigns.

We'd need an option that brings the airstart a lot closer to the action, rather than just shortly after take-off.

 

New Guinea has it all.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think keeping some eastern front relevant collector planes coming along to fill out the plane set for the battles we have would keep most eastern front fans happy during the western front and Pacific battle cycles. Earlier Yak, LaGG, I-16 and MiG models. I-153, Tu-2, Su-2, TB-3, Il-4, SB-2, Hurricane, Yak-9, La-7, IAR-80/81, He-112, Ju-87B, Do-17...

 

I would personally rather fill in gaps in the plane set before doing another battle. Not to mention the Odessa and Karelia maps in the works.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Sgt_Joch said:

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

When the Pacific Theater is greenlighted, the devs should do both Midway and Guadalcanal in one battle pack, but primarily Guadalcanal. The reason why both of them should be in one is because they were the turning points of WW2 in the PTO, many aircraft (minus mainly the Devastator) and ships fought in both battles, the Midway map would take much, much less time to make than the Guadalcanal map.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finland and Leningrad area would be great to fill the gaps with some planes we don't have yet. Hunting the Marat again would be epic.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

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. 

Agreed, New Guinea is the best option, it spans the whole war and has many possibilities. I still want a Midway expansion though even, if it's not the first Pacific expansion.

Share this post


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

When the Pacific Theater is greenlighted, the devs should do both Midway and Guadalcanal in one battle pack, but primarily Guadalcanal. The reason why both of them should be in one is because they were the turning points of WW2 in the PTO, many aircraft (minus mainly the Devastator) and ships fought in both battles, the Midway map would take much, much less time to make than the Guadalcanal map.

 

Yep 

Guadalcanal was THE turning point.

Midway was essentially the fight between Rocky and Apollo in the first Rocky movie. There was a “winner” only in a technical sense, but both sides exited the fight equally beat up, and entered the next fight (Guadalcanal/Rocky II) in a state of force parity. :) That state of equal standing is one of the things that makes Guadalcanal so compelling. Daily fighting over Henderson, the disadvantaged Cactus Air Force giving as good as it got.

 

 

 

After 6 months, the march up the Slot began and it was steadily downhill for Japan.

Dang it - wasn’t going to get into it again but couldn’t stop myself.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

That state of equal standing is one of the things that makes Guadalcanal so compelling.

 

Nah, I just have a mosquito-fetish, that's all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t misunderstand me, Midway as a stand alone scenario would be potentially disasterous. As I have alluded to and Joch has stated plainly “Midway,” represents a timeframe not a location. I expect more than a single atoll in an expanse of ocean. I’ve no doubt the Devs do as well, though, they haven’t said what other land masses they intend to include. Midway has been selected because the battle was significant, iconic and has broad name appeal. Don’t get bogged down in the weeds over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Gielow said:

Finland and Leningrad area would be great to fill the gaps with some planes we don't have yet. Hunting the Marat again would be epic.

 

I would love this. It's probably not a very commercial proposition compared to the Pacific or Med, but IL2 Forgotten Battles had some really interesting aircraft and was by far my favourite in the series. Hurricanes, Fokker D.XXIs, Brewsters, Gladiators etc. Wonderful stuff.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Don’t misunderstand me, Midway as a stand alone scenario would be potentially disasterous. As I have alluded to and Joch has stated plainly “Midway,” represents a timeframe not a location. I expect more than a single atoll in an expanse of ocean. I’ve no doubt the Devs do as well, though, they haven’t said what other land masses they intend to include. Midway has been selected because the battle was significant, iconic and has broad name appeal. Don’t get bogged down in the weeds over it.

 

Exactly - further as I’ve pointed out before it makes a great sand box for the many “what if” scenarios.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

 

That's a good point, but I could see a semi-historical setup for dogfight-servers and airstarts for offline-campaigns.

We'd need an option that brings the airstart a lot closer to the action, rather than just shortly after take-off.

 

New Guinea has it all.

 

 

 

So, WWWAAAYYYY off topic.

 

What if air starts were portals? Is that too gamey for most?

 

As I see it, you could take off from your base or carrier, fly to a way point then get dumped out where the air start is. Complete your mission then fly to a waypoint to get dumped out where you have to complete the mission with a successful landing. I think it’d be way more interesting than simple airstarts, force a certain level of airmanship, make map sizes reasonable, and cut down on six hours of blue sea navigation. FTR, I too am opposed to flying to some big hoop in the sky like a PS3 superhero game. You could easily make the mechanics nearly invisible and completely unobtrusive. Not only that, you could make short distance navigation important for the waypoint completion.

 

I see it potentially useful for multiple theaters/maps and not just for the pacific titles.

 

I’m sure this has been done before, though, I’ve never seen it. Again, too gamey or interesting game mechanics?

Edited by II/JG17_HerrMurf
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they should choose whatever scenery keeps their bills paid. If this is Pacific, fine with me. If this is Eastfront 1944/45 or 1943/44 or 1941 pre Moscow, that would be equally fine. Also there is so much additional stuff yet to explore: Normandy 1944, North Africa 1943, Italy 1943/44 and 1944/45. In the end everything which is good for us will be good for them, because they can create sales and francly I would love to see them stay in business long enough to finish my little whishlist.

Share this post


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

 

So, WWWAAAYYYY off topic.

 

What if air starts were portals? Is that too gamey for most?

 

As I see it, you could take off from your base or carrier, fly to a way point then get dumped out where the air start is. Complete your mission then fly to a waypoint to get dumped out where you have to complete the mission with a successful landing. I think it’d be way more interesting than simple airstarts, force a certain level of airmanship, make map sizes reasonable, and cut down on six hours of blue sea navigation. FTR, I too am opposed to flying to some big hoop in the sky like a PS3 superhero game. You could easily make the mechanics nearly invisible and completely unobtrusive. Not only that, you could make short distance navigation important for the waypoint completion.

 

I see it potentially useful for multiple theaters/maps and not just for the pacific titles.

 

I’m sure this has been done before, though, I’ve never seen it. Again, too gamey or interesting game mechanics?

 

No, I don't think that's too gamey, at least it's the least gamey of the options available to simulate long distance engagements in multiplayer.  What you propose is better than a plane old airstart, and it's much better than some situation where Carriers are almost within visible distance of each other, and having nothing but unrealistic furball contest in between.

 

There would have to be some mechanism in place if you have a shot up plane or low fuel supply that might not otherwise make it back to the carrier or land base, so I think that would involve some realistic calculations plus some random variables thrown in.  You can't really simulate Sakai's harrowing journey back to Rabaul, but nobody wants to fly back to base for several hours anyway online, so that's ok.

 

I still have no idea how you get the feel of an entire deckload strike going out in multiplayer, and then attacking as a group without resorting to AI.  And who the heck wants AI in MP?  Currently, in multiplayer, you might have 80 people on a server, but it's rare to see more than 4 or 5 flying together as a group, and singles are pretty common.  Having a lot of solo fliers attacking the big carrier group doesn't seem like a real simulation of some of the iconic carrier battles.

 

And yes, I guess it is way off topic...this thread wasn't about simulating Midway or Coral sea.  Sorry.

Edited by SeaSerpent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, SeaSerpent said:

 

And yes, I guess it is way off topic...this thread wasn't about simulating Midway or Coral sea.  Sorry.

 

Admittedly.

 

I’ve been contemplating a longer original post on the topic for some time now but the door was opened above. So, I decided to dive through it. 

 

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, FarflungWanderer said:

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

 

But that's exactly the plane I would love to fly... and perish. What a challenge to fly that beast!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

 

So, WWWAAAYYYY off topic.

 

What if air starts were portals? Is that too gamey for most?

 

As I see it, you could take off from your base or carrier, fly to a way point then get dumped out where the air start is. Complete your mission then fly to a waypoint to get dumped out where you have to complete the mission with a successful landing. I think it’d be way more interesting than simple airstarts, force a certain level of airmanship, make map sizes reasonable, and cut down on six hours of blue sea navigation. FTR, I too am opposed to flying to some big hoop in the sky like a PS3 superhero game. You could easily make the mechanics nearly invisible and completely unobtrusive. Not only that, you could make short distance navigation important for the waypoint completion.

 

I see it potentially useful for multiple theaters/maps and not just for the pacific titles.

 

I’m sure this has been done before, though, I’ve never seen it. Again, too gamey or interesting game mechanics?

 

CFS2 had a warp system, where you take off and fly to a set area on your path, then have the option of skipping to the next point, and the next etc.  It worked very well for long distances in the Pacific.  

Share this post


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

then have the option of skipping to the next point, and the next etc

 

Yeah Press [H] and you zapped to next waypoint or when enemy was close- Neat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem with Warp or Portal system in multiplayer is that you have a guy returning to his base through the portal, and then he is two hours in the future compared to the rest of the battle going on, and then when he takes off and goes back out again to the battle area through the portal, he's in a different time dimension then the rest of the battles that are currently going on.  The current battles playing out that are still taking place on the rest of the server were "over" 3 hours ago according to his clock, and he's now arriving from the future.  🤪🙄

 

They could call this module IL-2: Battle of The Final Countdown.

 

(I'll be here all week, try the veal...)

Edited by SeaSerpent
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a few others have said... Midway is the selling feature but I can see them potentially handling periods of time before and after including Guadalcanal.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

Nah, I just have a mosquito-fetish, that's all.

Come to my backyard at night, you are gonna love it!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

CFS2 had a warp system

Same with CFS3. I like better than the "Autopilot" in the IL-2 series.

Share this post


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

 

CFS2 had a warp system, where you take off and fly to a set area on your path, then have the option of skipping to the next point, and the next etc.  It worked very well for long distances in the Pacific.  

 

Yes it sure did, was a great feature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm... I would try flying over the China/Burma, what do you think?
10_1_b1.jpg10_1_b1.jpg10_4_b1.jpg

Edited by GTursonA523

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, GTursonA523 said:

Hmmm... I would try flying over the China/Burma, what do you think?
10_1_b1.jpg10_1_b1.jpg10_4_b1.jpg

 

I think the lack of defensive armament on that B-25 is a good indication of how much actual air combat you could expect in a 1944 China scenario.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seelow and the Baltic's would get my undivided attention. Those are two battles/theaters I'd love to see. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/10/2018 at 4:37 AM, Novice-Flyer said:

That is being covered by Cliffs of Dover

Not to me. CoD is old, has no VR and they won't get any of my money. IL-2 Great Battles will! It's a great game. 

 

I'm all for the western front, and North Africa + Sicily. It's a fantastic setting, with interesting assets and landscapes. Like so many folks stated here, the Pacific is something I'd love to see as well - and don't forget to put in some Chinese aircraft as well for JG5. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Northern Front (east europe) 1941 - 1943

Malaya, Singapor, Burma (south-east asia) 1941 / 1942

Italy (south europe) 1943 - 1944

Spanish Civil War (south-west europe) 1937 - 1938

 

At the Northern Front there they could include Finnland.

 

For Malaya is the need of british planes, which we have a few already.

 

In Italy you have the Goten-Line and Siegfried-Line, Monte Cassino, approaching from the Adria and Thyrenian Sea, sneaking between toscan mountains and so fort. Did that in IL-1946 at those SEOW campaign events few months ago also, and it was great.

 

Yes, the spanish civil war whit its unknown and early planes as the last powerful biplanes as well. Never covered in a video game but great possibilities in my opinion.

 

 

I dont think that some Midway gameplay is that fun. First it is mostly water, secondly, beside the impact this battle had in the war, very repetitive. Starting from a carrier (thats a high barrier for new players and honestly, I can not even land in WarThunder on a carrier).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. 

 

The northern element (Murmansk) is often overlooked and the possibilities there are very attractive with a relatively stable

front line. The only downside is that the Hurricane would be needed, and that is fugly. 

 

I know there was a Murmansk map in development but haven’t seen anything about it for a while. Ideally we’d have all 4 seasons. 

 

von Tom

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Finkeren said:

I think the lack of defensive armament on that B-25 is a good indication of how much actual air combat you could expect in a 1944 China scenario.

Sorry, but you couldn't be more wrong. Actually it would be a very interesting and balanced (aircraft-)setup prominently featuring many player-favourites (IJ/US Army) like Mustangs and Ki-84s in a tactical way few other Asiatic-Pacific-Theatre based scenarios do. Aircraft rarely seen in any game, like the P-40N and Ki-44, played a major role and bombers would have a wide variety of targets.

For a general overview I suggest this Wikipedia entry.

The only reason we will very likely miss this great scenario is the name...

11 hours ago, ShamrockOneFive said:

As a few others have said... Midway is the selling feature but I can see them potentially handling periods of time before and after including Guadalcanal.

I agree with you, it's all about the name. But I predict going for names will be the nail in the coffin of any further Asiatic-Pacific ambitions.
Those carrier missions are rather fascinating to many, yet they bore out most fairly quickly. After all, carrier warfare is just a piece of the puzzle. Basically all (the famous) scenarios of the Pacific Ocean Areas are nice and scenic for movies and first-person shooters, but rather bad choices for a flight-sim (Okinawa comes to mind).

Guadalcanal - the Solomon Island Campaign - would be a highly interesting scenario, but, as I explained in previous discussions, I doubt it's doable just for its size. And no, scaling is no solution at all! 

I say New Guinea 1942/43 or maybe even something CBI if they are adventurous. The sole drawback of NG in terms of in-game variety would be the lack of USN/USMC aircraft1, but at the same time it would allow for RAAF specific aircraft like the Beaufighter or Boomerang. Guadalcanal/Solomon Islands would lack those and Japanese Army aircraft2, the variety of targets would be much smaller and the whole scenario rather static.

 

1: Ignoring the rather insignificant carrier raid on Lae and Salamaua
2: Ignoring the rather insignificant short-term Involvement during Operation Ke

 

 

 

On the thread's original question: Yes, they probably have to return to the Eastern Front if they want further income from the theatre-specific customer base. As we see, they are capable of working on multiple subjects at the same time. Collector planes or stand-alone maps are not too far-fetched.
I, for one, certainly would like to see at least one more non-Luftwaffe Axis aircraft fitting the scenarios already released - like the IAR-38/39, IAR-80 or maybe even a MC.200 (to a lesser extent). The VVS could use an I-153, early Yak-1 and LaGG-3, late LaGG-3, Pe-3, ... - there is plenty of stuff!
They also could do something like "lite packs": Two to three aircraft per side and one map.
For example Khalkhin Gol: Introducing Japanese aircraft and providing early Soviet ones - killing two birds (aircraft) with one stone. ;)

Edited by =27=Davesteu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours 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 😄

 

Even I have been on wings of puberty a few times.  It doesn't mean that I am not a member of the SP community though.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that we might struggle to get a full plane set for another eastern front battle especially for the axis. And before anyone says it I know there are loads of obscure types. ...

 

 

I think in terms of the Eastern front by the time we have finished the Pacific they would be better off making addons like a map and/or plane packs instead of a full Box.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im all for midway because it gives balance planset for online servers and you can set carriers as close as you wont to island, but if game is aimed to sp mainly like some say then what campaign you gona have on that only 1 day and out? it would have to be something more including more battles with same planeset, like Battle of the Coral Sea, The Battle of the Eastern Solomons, The Battle of Santa Cruz just have with midway map one only sea map and your good to go.

 

for late east front you can still squise in for axis, 109g10, 190a9, ta152h1, ar234, me410 or late model of do217 vs yak3, la7, p-39Q15, il-10, tu-2s, there is room for one more late east expantion but is there big  interest for it i dont think so.

 

i hope they go like this:

 

Battle of Midway

Battle of Anzio

Battle of Seelow

Battle of Korea

 

1 hour ago, Feathered_IV said:

 

Even I have been on wings of puberty a few times.  It doesn't mean that I am not a member of the SP community though.

 

even i play in qm, single mission and so on so im then  also part of sp numbers :)? i dont know how they get to 90% to me it looks just repet of olegs numbers from 20 years ago, everthing is online now, steam say they have 50-100000 users and i see 26000played online on wol (few more who play online but never try wol) so to me 90% is just wrong, but belive what you wont, if that big number of users are sp why ai is so bad, it should be priority to fix for game orieanted to give good sp expiriance.

Edited by 77.CountZero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course Midway was only one day, just like the 'Operation Bodenplatte'. It is just the question, what they make out of this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But for bodenplatte you already have map that is good for more operations then just bodenplatte, for midway you have map that is good only for that 1 day, then you have to meake other maps for other stuff to offer with it, or just have one only sea map and use that for other 41-42 carrier v carrier battles 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Needs to be RoI-based: the BoS to BoK elements were laid by the initial plan and then built upon logically and using the best carry-over possible. EF 1944-45 is relatively simple, but revenue may be limited.

 

BoBp is more accessable and a very good idea (that I predicted a year or more ago as a logical venture to the West).

 

To consider:

- TF is doing NA

- Post-1943 Italy is easier but not sure about the sale potential

- DCS is doing Normandy

- BoB is probably not on due to CloD

- BoF (which I would love) can use an extended BoBp map / generation engine but runs into low potential revenue issues

 

Other theatres:

- BCI is a little interest-limited

- Carrier battles (Midway) has good selling points but is a lot of investment

- Guadacanal would be terrific though would require some maritime work and maybe lacks interest-generation (but possibly not - it might be a great seller)

- Korea lacks the instant interest, but can build on BoBp effort

 

Peronally, I think the Okinawa scenario - starting with a limited ship list - might be the low-risk / effort and would allow a move to a new theatre, but the Japanese aircraft are quite work-intensive.

 

Suspect the answer will depend upon BoBp sales.

Share this post


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

But for bodenplatte you already have map that is good for more operations then just bodenplatte, for midway you have map that is good only for that 1 day, then you have to meake other maps for other stuff to offer with it, or just have one only sea map and use that for other 41-42 carrier v carrier battles 

 

I suspect they could easily ship two maps with this project. The midway map would be 99% water plus Midway and Kure Atoll. They could probably toss in Wake Island and a few other options.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ShamrockOneFive said:

 

I suspect they could easily ship two maps with this project. The midway map would be 99% water plus Midway and Kure Atoll. They could probably toss in Wake Island and a few other options.

Agreed. Even those islands should be fairly simple, so they could even do three or more maps in one release.

 

I think they will want to leverage the new city building technology, so we might see more continental maps too.

Share this post


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

Of course Midway was only one day, just like the 'Operation Bodenplatte'. It is just the question, what they make out of this.

 

1 hour ago, 77.CountZero said:

But for bodenplatte you already have map that is good for more operations then just bodenplatte, for midway you have map that is good only for that 1 day, then you have to meake other maps for other stuff to offer with it, or just have one only sea map and use that for other 41-42 carrier v carrier battles 

 

The battle of midway lasted more than one day technically, but I do agree that Midway expansion should have multiple maps for playability.

Edited by Legioneod
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...