Some ideas for encouraging teamwork online!

[StrIke]

One thing I have never seen before in a combat flight sim that I think could be revolutionary is the creation of "squads" on the server like modern First Person Shooters such as Battlefield 3 or planetside 2 do.

 

I think the "pre-flight briefing" room with homebase, aircraft and loadout selections should have a "new mission" button, where a player gets to form a new sortie. The player becomes squad leader, and can select what type of mission, how many and which planes and set a target/objective. In example, this could be a precision strike on a bridge, where 2x light bombers escorted by 4x fighters are to bomb a bridge. The creator of the sortie can also add a description with instructions and set a takeoff/start time for the mission.

 

Now the creator can press "submit mission", and it will appear in the "pre-flight briefing" room for your teammates. This will allow them to click the mission, read about it and join the available planes on that mission. Maybe someone is looking for a bombing run, and jumps in a bomber, and other players want to join the fray as fighter escort. Whenever all slots are full/ready the mission leader can initiate the mission and override the takeoff time. A scramble feature may also be added, to launch the mission regardless if the squad is filled completely. All planes will now spawn at the same time, with a squad chat/voice chat setup already for the specific squad. If aircraft labels are on, these labels will be color-coded to show who is in your squad. This will help gather players looking for teamwork, to jump right into a user-defined mission. The players will have forced markings to make them distinguishable, and make for logic communication callouts. In addition, a squad member list could be displayer in a corner, to show what player has which plane.

 

If a player dies, he cannot spawn in mid-flight, or participate in that squad any more, he is returned to homebase briefing room, and can choose a new mission, or hit "fly" (lone wolf dogfight mode).

 

I also would like the use of a quick-callout feature. Like in planetside 2, if you press and hold a specific key, you get a interaction menu with the player you are looking at. This could easily be added to BoS and add a LOT to the experience. If you see a squadmate being chased by an enemy, you can look at him and hit the callout button. This will give you a list of options, linked to either mouse-click or numeric button press. Some of the options could be radio callouts automatically chosen by the game, i.e "Check six, break left, break right, you are on fire, bail out etc.". If he is number 3 in your flight, and you are number 1 and you see him being chased, you can look at him with trackIR or point your nose at him and hit the callout button, OR alternatively select him from a radio menu. Now click "check six", the game will generate the appropriate callout and you will hear on the radio: "3, check your six!!". For players without voice comms, this is a golden opportunity to contribute to the battle in a tactical way. Another use could be for target spotting. When you see a dot at 10 o'clock, you can look at it and click the callout button. Now you will have the option to select between bogey, enemy or friendly. If you're not sure, you can select bogey and the game will generate the appropriate callout for you, taking in consideration the relative clock position to your nose: "1, this is 3. Bogey spotted at 10 o'clock".

 

Also, it can be used for giving attack orders: Lets say you pass an armored column. You look at the tank column and hit the callout button; options are "spot, attack, artillery etc". You select attack, and then go to the next menu where you selects who should attack i.e ; Flight, 1 element, 2 element, wingman. If you select 2 element, the callout reads "2nd element, this is flight lead. Attack armored column at 3 o'clock. The player who receives the radio message, gets a pop-up menu with "Accept, decline". This will give the flight lead feedback. Depending on difficulty mode, the message could be coupled with a visible target waypoint and a sub-objective list displaying in the corner i.e "Destroy armored column 0/4", showing 0 of 4 tanks have been destroyed. If the 2nd element succeeds in destroying the 4 tanks, the game can automatically generate a radio message and reward the players with a objective completed confirmation, i.e "Flight lead, this is 2nd element leader. Target destroyed."

 

Again, aircraft can use this to callout artillery map grid references. Stare at the ground, select "call artillery" and get linked with AI artillery batteries. These will fire, report splash and after impact the player will be prompted with a correction menu "Fire for effect, adjust N/W/E/S->distance, cancel mission etc...".

 

The possibilities of this kind of one-button communication/interaction menu system, if executed properly, can add so much to the game. Instead of joining a furball dogfight server, you actually have tools to create missions within the server, team up and act as a team. Even if you do not have Teamspeak or a working mic, you can still communicate without having to chat/type. The conventional radio menu we know from 1946 can be used in calm conditions, and the quick-callout button will give you options for exactly what you are looking at, removing the need to focus on a long list of radio menu options.

 

I think this will result in a lot more organized flying, and large formations/flights of aircraft working together will be a more common sight in the skies.

Edited January 11, 2013 by StrIke

[Mysticpuma]

I read this in the Developers discussion thread and must add my support. Excellently described and worthy of considering by the Developers.

 

Cheers, MP

[=BKHZ=Furbs]

Great ideas, love the squad system, maybe add a join "in flight" if the squad is a certain distance from the front line and has spare slots?

[StrIke]

Thanks for your feedback guys!

 

I think that these relatively simple features can bring a lot into the game. Rise of flight had hand gestures, which looked great up close, but like real WWI aircraft, none were really equipped with radios. BoS will need a robust comms menu, and I think CloD did wrong here, by copying the old system. I still can't believe how broken it was though :\

 

The mission creation system would bring that IL-2 1946 style "COOP" feeling back. Each player has to ready up and fly. However, if we will be seeing large servers with many players a COOP system, where power is given to the user to create missions by selecting a map target/area and selecting the planes for the job. I always preferred COOP until MDS (moving dogfight server) arrived. The problem was that if you didn't know the other players, or were on Teamspeak with them, you would always fly alone and "do your thing". If we mix the two, a player has the choice. Should I prefer lone wolf, then I select base, loadout and hit fly. Should I prefer teamwork, I'll scan the list of planned missions, find one starting soon, and join the ready room. Here one can wait for the squad to fill up, discuss tactics, choose planes/seats and review the mission details before takeoff. Perfect. If you want to go lone wolf, but you're not sure were the action is, a quick look at the mission list will show where their targets are so you can get a sense of where everybody is heading.

 

Great ideas, love the squad system, maybe add a join "in flight" if the squad is a certain distance from the front line and has spare slots?

 

I think this could be done, but in terms of realism one would have to set a few ground rules like you have, but perhaps with some stricter modifications:

 

If a squad takes off without all places taken, these are NOT flown by AI (or can be selected like in ARMA, where free slots can be AI ON/OFF). However, say a flight intended for 10, only fills up 7/10. This flight still allows ground spawning until the leader aircraft of that squad is airborne. After that, air spawns are allowed. Spawn points would be close to the leader about 500m behind him, or if he is dead behind the second in command and so on. IF, however, the flight is within X km of enemies, the late-joining player will start beyond visual range of ALL enemies, facing the squad leader. This way, you'll never see enemies "pop-up" in the air, and friendlies will only pop up when there is no action going on (this would in some ways simulate a late takeoff teammate trying to catch up with his squad).

When this player joins, the player consumes another plane from the squad capacity, so now only two slots remain available.

 

It should be discussed whether a penalty is applied to previous member of that squad to prevent players that fly 1 or 2 people in a squad with 10 slots, to use these as "extra lives". Either one can permanently lock out a deceased squad member from that sortie, or add a cruel time-penalty. I just don't want it exploited so 2 players can fly "forever" until both are dead simultaneously. Much like squads in Battlefield 3; even if 3 out of 4 squad members are dead the 4th member could be hiding in a bush acting as a spawn point.

[=BKHZ=Furbs]

Agree, no muti spawns like BF3, but you can join a mission in the air if it meets the criteria set down by the server...

[csThor]

Sorry to be negative, but you can devise the most elaborate and thought-out system and you will still fail to achieve more teamwork. Why? Because the majority of players just don't care. They want to think of themselves as [insert-historical-Ace-here] reborn and give a flying fart about teamplay, team goals and mission tasks ...

[wiseblood]

That's right csThor. But the idea is to make "being on a team with a bunch of dudes" even if they're strangers the easier - and default - option, even if you didn't do anything.

[StrIke]

Sorry to be negative, but you can devise the most elaborate and thought-out system and you will still fail to achieve more teamwork. Why? Because the majority of players just don't care. They want to think of themselves as [insert-historical-Ace-here] reborn and give a flying fart about teamplay, team goals and mission tasks ...

 

I am sure the casual reborn WW2 fighter ace will eventually realize that having squadmembers to get you out of tight spots is important. Especially when we will be meeting 109s in I16s. Also, like I mentioned the usual lone-wolf "fly" button will be there, for players that think they are their own airforce. That way, people looking for an objective or that just appreciate the formation flying and teamwork, have the opportunity to do so. I must admit that when playing with friends on a dogfight server, this feature is sorely missed. If you couple the squad feature with a Voice over IP, you could actually communicate with strangers in your squad. I often find myself playing IL-2, and getting joined by a random friendly. This guy just sticks to my wing, but it's too complicated for me to chat with him during flight, or give any instructions or feedback. With the squad system one could do just that. If you find a player you like, you can invite him to squad and then have direct voice comms.

 

I see your viewpoint, but I do think that a large majority of players who "don't care" are inexperienced or have their mind set on something specific that doesn't have anything to do with teamwork. I know a bunch of people that fly solo because the server has no objective, they can't predict what other players are planning to do and there's no guidelines to follow. This results in the usual "I'll just take off, fly towards frontline or map grid and see what's there". If you know before takeoff what the goal is, when takeoff time is, what role you have and how many you are it might actually appeal to many casual players looking for that opportunity to join a group. Also imagine the recruitment possibilities when squadleaders can better monitor the actions of their squadmembers, the organized "online wars" can benefit from the default mission creator to group players quickly and assign targets (these people will obviously want to recreate history by flying as a team in total realism of tactics and formations).

 

What I can say is, when flying in a group you can draw many benefits from being in numbers. Firstly, bombers flying together already equals more volume of turret gunfire, and by seeing a 4-ship escort tagging along you might actually just NOT want to attack that formation if you are a lone-wolf. On the other hand, if you are in a group, you may be able to use tactics to draw the fighter escort away from the bombers, whilst the second element waits and strikes when the bombers are unprotected. The result is; bombers do not reach target and the defending team keeps their objective alive.

 

I see this happening a lot even in games like planetside. Players who never met before that are put into a group will see all squadmates in a specific colour. This means it's easier to follow and group with your squad. Furthermore, you will receive extra points for healing, reviving, resupplying and repairing squadmates. Also, the squad leaders can set waypoints, that clearly tell where the squad is supposed to focus their efforts. In more than one occation we had a platoon of 15 tanks + 4 bombers and 7 fighters moving along as one unit. The result was; we captured several bases, until the enemy did the exact same thing: organized a defending platoon. At that point there was a stalemate and they held their turf. I am 100% positive, that if the enemy had the same amount of players, but non-organized, we would still beat them further into their territory.

 

Why shouldn't such a feature be present in the game by default? I honestly think it will inspire players to work more as a team, and at least present the opportunity for new guys to find a squad and learn the ropes. Perhaps players could get bonus score for killing an enemy that has been firing on a squadmate recently (saviour), killing an enemy that has just claimed a kill (avenger), formation bonus for each x amount of seconds you are within x meters of squad leader. I would not like those typical epic banners and score counters in the middle of your screen announcing your bonuses all the time, but maybe a subtle chat-menu notice. When you check your scoreboard, you will see who is contributing most to the team, not who has the most kills. A lone wolf obviously will get only the base-points for killing things, but flying in a squad will earn him bonuses. Completing an objective issued by flight lead should also give more points, completing the objective alltogether should also give a large bonus to all squadmembers alive at the end of the mission.

 

Don't you think it will have a noticable effect on the servers? I do

Edited January 13, 2013 by StrIke

[76SQN-FatherTed]

I think that this is a pretty good idea, and would like to see it it implemented, as long as it would not take up too much development time/money.

 

One thing I see happening on the "realism" servers of RoF is people forming ad-hoc squads, i.e. you happen to take off with someone or come across a friendly or two who you tag onto.  People do this, I believe, not because of an arbitrary points system, but because it enables them to play the game more successfully - and for the same reasons that people flew together IRL.  I think this is a far more powerful motive for encouraging team-based play than point-scoring.  If the game is realistic enough, it will push people towards a "realistic" play-style simply because they won't get so much out of it otherwise.  I would not go so far as to have squad leaders and mission plans on pub servers, but I would provide a decent voice-comms system in-game, so that people can join together and coordinate if they wish

 

Incidentally, I'd go further than raaaid, and take out points for air-to-air kills entirely.   I've suggested this on the forum for a tactical FPS which is in development.  My point is that what we mostly play these games for is the "kill", so shouldn't really need rewarding for achieving that goal.   If we want a game where people don't just lone-wolf to rack up a big kill-score, then you need to reward them for doing the other stuff.  The only problem there is measuring the performance - how can you rate how good a job a wing-man has done?

[slm]

Incidentally, I'd go further than raaaid, and take out points for air-to-air kills entirely.  

Options like this could be useful in Coops. If the mission goal is for bombers to destroy some target and fighters to protect them,

mission could specify that score increases only if enough of the target is destroyed and enough planes return to home base.

[4Shades]

This (comms, on-screen target designation, artillery calls etc) may increase sensible play online, but it does sound like a 21st Century solution to a 1940s problem. Appropriate? Historical? Not convinced.

 

Cheers,

4S

[76SQN-FatherTed]

This (comms, on-screen target designation, artillery calls etc) may increase sensible play online, but it does sound like a 21st Century solution to a 1940s problem. Appropriate? Historical? Not convinced.

 

Cheers,

4S

Firstly I'd say that I would have all these sorts of things available as options so that those who want to play "full switch" can do so, and those who don't can have their own settings. Hopefully the game will be popular enough that there will be different styles of server to suit most tastes.

 

I'd also say that sometimes an adherence to strict realism can result in a not so realistic experience because of the limitations of controlling a picture on a 2D screen with poor resolution, as opposed to sitting in a real aircraft.  Another thing is the fact that you don't have as good eyesight in games as in real-life, so things like hand-signals and code-letters on planes are not so useful.  Allowing comms can make up for this shortfall.

 

There can be a trade-off between using historically inappropriate technology (eg Teamspeak) and the immersion of seeing historically appropriate behaviour (eg formations) which is all-but impossible to achieve by sticking to the sort of RT available in the 1940s.

 

I'm just trying to say that the whole flightsim thing is smoke and mirrors, so I don't see a problem with allowing a bit more if it gives the user more immersion.

Edited February 3, 2013 by FatherTed

[StrIke]

 

I'd also say that sometimes an adherence to strict realism can result in a not so realistic experience because of the limitations of controlling a picture on a 2D screen with poor resolution, as opposed to sitting in a real aircraft.  Another thing is the fact that you don't have as good eyesight in games as in real-life, so things like hand-signals and code-letters on planes are not so useful.  Allowing comms can make up for this shortfall.

 

This is my thought exactly, and also explained above. When I fly lonewolf IL-2, I can only do so much. Win some 1v1 or jump on some unaware enemies six. I cannot tell my teammates that they have a 109 on their back, it's too much chat-typing. They are not in teamspeak, we are isolated.

 

With teamspeak, I can reach out to team members, give them orders, tell them how they're doing, check their six etc... This works very well when I coordinate with friends, but more than often I find that other online players don't join the server's TS channel and are ignorant.

 

With this built-in feature, you can call out enemies as you see them. I do not suggest the battlefield 3 detection where you can slam the Q button to scan for enemies your eyes can't see and get them highlighted as enemies. I mean that if you see a speck on the horizon, the menu will allow you do choose yourself wheter to call out "bogey" or "hostile". You be your own judge.

 

Players without mic can still communicate with others and contribute to situational awareness, issue orders and other things.

 

For artillery I think that once you give your fire-mission, there should be a random inaccuracy that will land the shots close to target to avoid "insta-kills". After that, the player would have to input direction and distance corrections to "earn" the kill.

 

If 4S would have his way. You would have to set frequency, call artillery battery chief, manually input grid reference, wait for impact, call corrections etc etc etc... all whilst still flying a plane. It would make life hard and 'unrealistic' from our 2D screen interface.

 

Think about the crowd aswell. The average pilot may enjoy a more easy to use system. Everything is about making it user-friendly, whilst keeping the flying, fighting and tactics realistic. An easy to use comms/interaction menu could facilitate this, and difficulty settings could enable/disable the exploits this system has.

 

Even battlefield 3, in hardcore mode, had this. In casual mode, all spotted enemies would show up on minimap and "HUD" as orange/red dots, tanks, helis or jets. Unrealistic - but adds a lot to teamplay and helps the action level stay high.

 

In Hardcore mode, you could still use "Q" to spot enemies, but all you would get is a radio call saying "enemy armor spotted". No grid ref or symbols or anything on the hud.

 

I think it could be scalable quite easily. And battlefield 3 is living proof that the "Q" spot button encourages teamwork, situational awareness and may contribute to the victory.

 

I think the devs should seriously consider such a feature!

[4Shades]

All things are forgivable, as long as they are optional so people can choose the kind of game that suits their individual needs.

 

[slm]

For artillery I think that once you give your fire-mission, there should be a random inaccuracy that will land the shots close to target to avoid "insta-kills". After that, the player would have to input direction and distance corrections to "earn" the kill.

 

If 4S would have his way. You would have to set frequency, call artillery battery chief, manually input grid reference, wait for impact, call corrections etc etc etc... all whilst still flying a plane. It would make life hard and 'unrealistic' from our 2D screen interface.

 

Think about the crowd aswell. The average pilot may enjoy a more easy to use system. Everything is about making it user-friendly, whilst keeping the flying, fighting and tactics realistic. An easy to use comms/interaction menu could facilitate this, and difficulty settings could enable/disable the exploits this system has.

 

Using such quickly responding, easy to use artillery system would NOT be realistic tactic.

Most arty targets were ordered by forward observers  firmly on the ground. Flying FOs were not that common.

And AFAIK when they were used they used special planes good for this task, such as

Fieseler Storch or Taylorcraft Auster.

 

So if this arty ability was available only to these slow planes, then it would be much more realistic.

Just like all plane types cannot carry bombs.

[StrIke]

 

So if this arty ability was available only to these slow planes, then it would be much more realistic.

Just like all plane types cannot carry bombs.

 

Of course!

 

I realize I have not expressed myself thoroughly enough here. I mean like you say, if you had a Fiesler Storch, Piper Grasshopper or such, yes! And it would in no way be an easy "quick barrage" feature. All it would be is that you select an arty-capable plane, or arty/recon mission type where your function is to enhance the ground based FO's task.

 

Scenario:

 

A ground battle wages on, and frontline F.Os will use artillery on visual targets. If you choose a mission as arty spotter, you would fly to the frontline, spot targets at a greater distance than of the ground F.Os, and deal damage to troops before they reach the frontline. That would mean that you're weakening the enemy before they make it to the frontline. Or maybe you could fly ahead of an attack and take out entrenched positions to weaken their defense. When on this mission or flying a spotter plane, you would use comms menu to establish a network with an available friendly artillery battery. Once this is established, the pop-up menu artillery function becomes available. You can now look-click the physical world position of the target (or if you prefer, you can map-click) and this initiates an auto-generated fire mission request radio message. Once received by the battery, they will fire and tell you when calculated splash is. Now you must look for the impact, then correct any offset by choosing compass direction, then x meters/feet and repeat fire mission. This would pretty much require the player to circle the area and become exposed. The benefit however, is that if the player stays alive long enough to carry out the fire mission, it will have devastating effect on the enemy. A ground battle may be won much quicker by thinning out the ranks before the opposing sides meet.

 

As a fighter, you would have a tough time picking out a single recon/spotter plane, but once you find him he's dead meat without protection.

 

For ground attack missions, you may want a callout feature to facilitate comms (remember non-voice comm players). Say squadleader sees enemy tank platoon about 10 km to the east. With team chat you are really constricted. I think that if you use the callout button, you aim your view at the tanks, select "Attack" order, then "Tanks" and lastly "Flight"(who should attack). Then the radio automatically says "Blue flight, this is blue leader. Attack enemy armour heading 90?

[slm]

That sounds like a special mission some people like playing:

1 player piloting the observer plane and maybe 2 planes protecting him.

While lots of other things happen in other parts of the map.

 

And if there was enough delay from the observer commands to shells hitting ground people would notice how difficult it would be to use against moving targets.

[T_O_A_D]

I like the way you took the time and laid this idea out out, and it has been a topic among myself and others, after dabbling into FPS again.

During the lack of Flight sim interest and disappointing news about CLOD.

 

So I'm a fan of it and the implementation of it or as close as possible to it in Flight Simming.

[4Shades]

The next step is to make the artillery available only if there actually IS artillery on the map and in range of the designated target.

[StrIke]

When on this mission or flying a spotter plane, you would use comms menu to establish a network with an available friendly artillery battery. Once this is established, the pop-up menu artillery function becomes available.

 

 

Yes indeed, so you would have to use in-game map-placed artillery batteries to do this.

[slm]

The next step is to make the artillery available only if there actually IS artillery on the map and in range of the designated target.

Of course the artillery could be located just outside the visible map.

Such off-map artillery is possible in some tactical warfare games, like

 

http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=273&Itemid=459

Edited February 5, 2013 by slm

[4Shades]

But we are talking about a Stalingrad map that is 200 km square roughly, I think. Maximum ranges for WW2 howitzers (150mm) were about 12-17 km, Leopold rail guns (280mm) up to 60 km, Katyushas about 6 km. In flight terms, the average artillery pieces were pretty close to the front lines!

 

Cheers,

4S

[LG1.Farber]

200 by 200 km?  40000km, I hope not.  The channel map for clod is around 360 by 311km so thats 111960 sq km.  That would be 36% of the size of the clod map... 

[4Shades]

Well, whatever the size, the map is going to be large enough so that off-map artillery will be unrealistic for the majority of locations on the map.

[Rumpfi]

Best Thread ever!

 

If that all would be implemented that would be nice!!

 

It shouldn?

Edited February 26, 2013 by Rumpfi

[Bearcat]

Some of these suggestions are very good..

[StrIke]

Some of these suggestions are very good..

 

Thank you for your interest! My only hope is that if they decide to use a similar system, they implement it correctly. My version may be flawed, but the general idea of accessability to larger crowds + ease of use will help breach the barrier and convert more people into hardcore mode.

All my real life friends that I have taught to play IL-2 1946 has said it has a very steep learning curve. Even with easy settings and icons. Once I walked them through the basics, they're still only cannon fodder in the air. The act of combat manouvering and knowing every planes strengths and weaknesses are key to succeeding, and for most people succeeding is the most fun part of playing games!

 

If we think about the big picture it's vital to the flight sim niche market that we soften the landing for the new guys. Bringing in systems like the one I mentioned would hopefully do just that.

 

Creating squads (flights) or packages (multiple flight groups) will give the lone wolf a certain purpose. My personal opinion is that I grow tired of just flying and dying. "Takeoff, head towards frontline, shoot or get shot, return, repeat". If I had the choice to either do that, or wait 5 minutes in the ready room for a squad to takeoff with a specific goal, I'd easily choose the 5 minute wait. But in order to work as a group, there must be some core game mechanics that "bind" the group. Equal markings for every plane with correct tail numbers is a visual cue, voice comms with a nickname prefix (Flight no/tail no) lets you know who is who. Private voice channel for package and flight lets you shut out the common chatter, and listen in on the important stuff. Channels would be Team/Flight/Squad and also one for pre-flight briefings. The quick callout button still is very useful for those without voice comms, but want to participate in teamplay. They get access to basic voice menus but also the ability to interact with the object in the center of the screen. Imagine as a rookie you don't have Track IR. So you use mouselook to look at a flight that you make out to be 3 heinkels at a higher altitude paralell to your flight. You hover the mouse (center of screen) over the heinkels, and hit the quick-callout button. The menu says "spot", "attack", "escort" etc... showing you relevant tasks to the object in hand. You quickly select spot which takes you to "enemy/friendly/bogey" and select enemy, then fighter/bomber, then unknown/stukas/heinkels/88's/dorniers etc.. If you select heinkels, the system will process the information and also scan a given sphere around the target for multiples of the same aircraft. If more than one, the callout will read "heinkels" instead of "heinkel". The system then takes account clock-position relative to your flight's average direction, relative height and generates the message:

"1 this is [your plane number], I've spotted enemy heinkels, 10 o'clock high". This will alert ALL members of that flight (or package) that there are heinkels here. If you see them far away, and you're not sure what aircraft they are, you could do "Spot -> Bogey" and the readout would be. "1 this is [your number], I've got bogies, 10 o'clock high"  This would focus attention in that direction, and lead to the resolving of a potential threat faster.

 

An even more quickly way to do this is to press and release the quick callout button quickly. That would work as a spot feature with very basic info. Let's say you're flying, when you spot two bf-109s closing in from your 8 o'clock and you need to say something fast. Just point and tap quick callout and you'll say "1 this is [your number], multiple contacts, 8 o'clock"

 

Think about the difficulty of starting to type a chat message at the same time.

 

In any case, this is becoming a wall of text I hope it makes sense though. I'd like to see something like it implemented! Especially the squad system!

[AA_Engadin]

All my real life friends that I have taught to play IL-2 1946 has said it has a very steep learning curve. 

 

I agree with you 100%. And one of the hardest steps is becoming an acceptable level shot. You really start to enjoy this sim when you begin sending down planes in flames.     Well bombers are not 'nervous' targets you can get with a little practice, given they don't go acrobatic very often.

 

On the other hand you find the 109 or Spit. Well, these are another story.

 

So my idea goes this way: to check your aim, tracks are a very valuable tool, given they allow you to move around in the space, to check were your bullets hit, even allowing you to see it slow-mo. In my humble opinion there is only one 'but' to the use of tracks: you can only move the action 'forward', you cannot 'rewind' to see once and again what went wrong with the deflection shot supposedly intended to saw your foe's wing off.

 

Then, is it possible to implement a sliding button - 'a la youtube' - so that you can check a sequence without the hassle you have to pass through at present? With the powerful option to watch it from different perspectives every time, the possibility to learn from your mistakes gets increased ten times or more. Always IMHO.

 

I know this proposal is not, let's say, very 'historically accurate' given RL pilots learned with the old fashioned daily practice. But none of them got alive from a vertical dive from 15.000 ft. at 500 km/h while we do it everyday with our snacks and beer at hand    . Just a sim, in the end.

 

Thank you anyway.

 

AA_Engadin.

Edited March 13, 2013 by AA_Engadin