Jump to content
LUZITANO

IL-2 Battle of Normandy (BOBP cousin)

Recommended Posts

On 5/9/2019 at 1:04 AM, ShamrockOneFive said:

Overall I really love the Normandy concept. It's another great battle that features tactical airpower to a great extent.

 

I would suggest that the aircraft set is a bit off with two types. I'd love to see the Mosquito FB.VI added to the aircraft set but it really should be swapped places with the Typhoon Mark IB. The OP may not know but the Typhoon was equipped by an enormous number of squadrons and used heavily during the invasion and in the aftermath. When it came to supporting troops on the ground, the Typhoon was the most used with some squadrons using the RP rockets and others using 500lb bombs. Typically a pair of Typhoons would be on station ready to strike at all times, strike, and then be replaced by two more.

 

The Mossie is fantastic but comparatively less relevant.

They (aircraft) can be exchanged
I like to solve everything with polls

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, if we are going for a Cross-Channel Invasion scenario then I'd rather have Dieppe in August 42. Like Bodenplatte, just a one-day affair, but a HUGE all-day air battle above the town. From a development point of view it would be a smaller map and smaller invasion fleet as well. As long as the map isn't TOO small then there are plenty of other scenarios that can be done - Circuses, Rhubarbs, Rodeos for example. Plus the occasional Baedekker. The comprehensive plane set is fairly simple too:

 

We already have:

 

Spitfire Vb,

 

Fw190A-3

Bf109F-4

Bf109G-2 (should really be a G-1 but there's not much difference)

He111H-6

Ju88A-4

 

 

We'd need:

 

Spitfire IXc (could use the IXe at a pinch but the wings are different)

Hurricane IIc

Typhoon Ia

Mustang Ia

Blenheim IV

Boston III

 

Dornier Do217E-2

 

and a Beaufighter I as a Collector plane.

 

A difficult sell to those of us who already have the existing BoX titles and don't want to pay for the Luftwaffe planes again, but certainly a favourite for me. :biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Battle of Normandy should include the Hawker Tempest V.

 

Combat report evidence can be viewed via the link below to the Hawker Tempest Page.

 

Note combat reports starting from 8th June 1944.

 

http://www.hawkertempest.se/index.php/piloter/combat-reports

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

 

Battle of Normandy should also include the Spitfire Mk XIV.

 

Below is and extract from this site (note links to combat reports at the end of the paragraph): http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14v109.html

 

After participating in Operation Overlord, the successful landings in Normandy, the Spitfire XIV Squadrons were engaged in anti-diver duties for approximately two months. On 9 August 1944 Nos. 91 and 322 delivered their Spitfires XIVs to 350 (Belgian) and 402 (Winnipeg Bear) Squadrons at Hawkinge, while No. 130 (Punjab) Squadron also converted to Spitfire XIVs that month at Lympne. By mid August the V-1 diver threat had waned and the Spitfire XIV Squadrons went back to offensive operations over the continent. 5  6  7  8  

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

Edited by 56RAF_Talisman

Share this post


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

Personally, if we are going for a Cross-Channel Invasion scenario then I'd rather have Dieppe in August 42. Like Bodenplatte, just a one-day affair, but a HUGE all-day air battle above the town. From a development point of view it would be a smaller map and smaller invasion fleet as well. As long as the map isn't TOO small then there are plenty of other scenarios that can be done - Circuses, Rhubarbs, Rodeos for example. Plus the occasional Baedekker. The comprehensive plane set is fairly simple too:

 

We already have:

 

Spitfire Vb,

 

Fw190A-3

Bf109F-4

Bf109G-2 (should really be a G-1 but there's not much difference)

He111H-6

Ju88A-4

 

 

We'd need:

 

Spitfire IXc (could use the IXe at a pinch but the wings are different)

Hurricane IIc

Typhoon Ia

Mustang Ia

Blenheim IV

Boston III

 

Dornier Do217E-2

 

and a Beaufighter I as a Collector plane.

 

A difficult sell to those of us who already have the existing BoX titles and don't want to pay for the Luftwaffe planes again, but certainly a favourite for me. :biggrin:

Clod already have map for it, and will probably cover 1942 channal battles after tf5 that covers 1941 there ( already said they plan to do 190s ad spit9s next so, Dieppe is covered then )

So then Normandy that is 1944 is better option if both games should exist at same time, to not make same things as it would take long time to get to normandy cronologicly for clod.

 

Also it would be imposible to have 5v5 type of airplanes that BoX needs for DLCs.

 

But all this is what if as Midway is next 100% ;D

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, 77.CountZero said:

 

But all this is what if as Midway is next 100% ;D 

 

 

 

 I do hope that you are right! Not convinced though... :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Pacific can't be done next, i would enjoy Normandy.

I do hope that they can bring droptanks if the maps include england.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I would definitely like the pacific, but I’d like to see an operation torch/dday senecio before hand.  While we are playing that and bobp , they can spend time on the first module of the pacific uninterrupted.... that is my hope any way.  I would really like an Italian map though!

Edited by -332FG-Buddy
Spelling
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, -332FG-Buddy said:

I would definitely like the pacific, but I’d like to see an operation torch/dday senecio before hand.  While we are playing that and bobp , they can spend time on the first module of the pacific uninterrupted.... that is my hope any way.  I would really like an Italian map though!

 

D-Day and the whole post Operation Overlord would dovetail nicely with Bodenplatte just as Battle of Moscow leads to Stalingrad leads to Kuban. The aircraft sets could build on each other so nicely that they would help fill gaps in each others' setups.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great conversation! However there are a few issues.

 

#1 - Although a western theater map would be great idea, I don't see such a product working with the current line of maps. I think Bragaton or Berlin would bring more closer to the Eastern Front than BOBp and the concept of Normandy. Not to mention the IL-2 aircraft/brand wouldn't be so catchy in the west as the IL-2 isn't a household name is it is in the East. Thus it will not get any "impulse purchasers" without rebranding the game.

 

#2 - I heard the current engine cannot handle the # of gunner positions in the B-17 and B-24.

 

#3 - As the CoD is still on the market, creating a western map would cannibalize their own sales.  Making a product to compete with a product you already have out there is a MKT 101 no no.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said:

Great conversation! However there are a few issues.

 

#1 - Although a western theater map would be great idea, I don't see such a product working with the current line of maps. I think Bragaton or Berlin would bring more closer to the Eastern Front than BOBp and the concept of Normandy. Not to mention the IL-2 aircraft/brand wouldn't be so catchy in the west as the IL-2 isn't a household name is it is in the East. Thus it will not get any "impulse purchasers" without rebranding the game.

 

#2 - I heard the current engine cannot handle the # of gunner positions in the B-17 and B-24.

 

#3 - As the CoD is still on the market, creating a western map would cannibalize their own sales.  Making a product to compete with a product you already have out there is a MKT 101 no no.

I agree with only your observation that it will (indirectly due to planeset difference) compete with CLOD. I do not agree that IL-2 must be tied to the eastern front (first gen IL-2 matured away from the east, and succeeded) or that 4 engined bombers are required for Normandy to work. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/20/2019 at 9:17 AM, -332FG-Buddy said:

While we are playing that and bobp , they can spend time on the first module of the pacific uninterrupted

Users(!) have been saying stuff like this ever since BoK and the "eventual move to the Pacific Theatre" were announced - three years ago. Objectively, it's now or never.

The Asiatic-Pacific Theatre is doable if both, the developers and the userbase, free themselves from the limiting perception of the Asiatic-Pacific Theatre being nothing but carrier battles, island hopping and naval aviation.

 

 

I don't get the attraction of a scenario like Operation Overlord, especially not right after BoBP. Some Western Front-centric users have been arguing about the repetitive Eastern Front for years - I bet they would celebrate the Normandy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said:

Great conversation! However there are a few issues.

 

#1 - Although a western theater map would be great idea, I don't see such a product working with the current line of maps. I think Bragaton or Berlin would bring more closer to the Eastern Front than BOBp and the concept of Normandy. Not to mention the IL-2 aircraft/brand wouldn't be so catchy in the west as the IL-2 isn't a household name is it is in the East. Thus it will not get any "impulse purchasers" without rebranding the game.

 

#2 - I heard the current engine cannot handle the # of gunner positions in the B-17 and B-24.

 

#3 - As the CoD is still on the market, creating a western map would cannibalize their own sales.  Making a product to compete with a product you already have out there is a MKT 101 no no.

 

It's absolutely fair to bring all of those points up I'm not sure if any of those are issues or they were already issues and it doesn't matter so much any more.

 

IL-2 1946 and Pacific Fighters (admittedly a sub brand of the IL-2 line) did quite well apparently so there is brand awarenes. My experience at FS Expo was that there were people there that loved the original IL-2 and just had no idea there was a second or third generation as we have now. There was more than one person I talked to who said something along the lines of "IL-2? I used to love to fly that one. There's a new one?!"

 

I talked to Jason about bombers and the only real issue is building them. It'd take a whole year for the team to develop one of the big bombers was his estimation. I'm sure if the AI was really an issue they'd come up with a solution and none of the dev team have ever said anything about AI and the number of gunners. It's always been speculative from the community and we're not always the best at guessing the issues there.

 

Normandy would be like Bodenplatte being a tactical scenario and so the bombers that I'd be more interested in seeing would be the B-26, B-25 and maybe the Do 217 all which participated in tactical strikes during the campaign. To be fair, the B-17 and B-24 were used in a single tactical operation and it was disastrous.

 

I don't think Cliffs of Dover would be cannibalized any more than it already is with another West front title. Bodenplatte already does that.

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a Normandy is done for IL-2 GB I think it would be post D-Day because if you did D-Day, you might as well do the Battle of Britain, which won't happen as that will primarily be a waste of resources. I think Bodenplatte is a great interim from BoK to PTO because droppable fuel tanks are implemented, American voices are added; a few less things that have to be made during development of a Pacific battle.

If there is no Pacific after BoBp then I think the devs will:

a. Focus upon TC until Pacific is ready

b. Early or Late war Eastern Front e.g Smolensk (41/43), Leningrad, Lvov, Bagration, etc.

c. Focus on filler planes, flyable or AI like C-47 (Li-2 after), B-24, B-26, B-17, MBR-2, Fw 189, Pe-3, TB-3 etc.

d. Several of the above.

 

    A member of TFS said that making a B-24 for CloD would take 6-8 months minimum for the cockpit, internal positions like bombardier, gunners, and the making the entire plane itself would take a year minimum. IIRC, the B-24D currently in IL-2 1946 took some years to make/test. To me, I think they should make a B-17 AI first because B-24 (1946), B-26 (CloD potentially for TF 6.0).

 

Jason stated that he wants to see what TFS has to offer before deciding to compete in an area that they're going to like North Africa, Battle of Britain as people would buy only one game. However, years in the future when they've done everything that they wanted to make and if there is a great interest for North Africa and Battle of Britain to be made for IL-2 GB, then they will, but for now, no. I mean, Cliffs of Dover is part of the IL-2 series, so there's no use complaining about just because it exists.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Novice-Flyer said:

If a Normandy is done for IL-2 GB I think it would be post D-Day because if you did D-Day, you might as well do the Battle of Britain, which won't happen as that will primarily be a waste of resources. I think Bodenplatte is a great interim from BoK to PTO because droppable fuel tanks are implemented, American voices are added; a few less things that have to be made during development of a Pacific battle.

If there is no Pacific after BoBp then I think the devs will:

a. Focus upon TC until Pacific is ready

b. Early or Late war Eastern Front e.g Smolensk (41/43), Leningrad, Lvov, Bagration, etc.

c. Focus on filler planes, flyable or AI like C-47 (Li-2 after), B-24, B-26, B-17, MBR-2, Fw 189, Pe-3, TB-3 etc.

d. Several of the above.

  

    A member of TFS said that making a B-24 for CloD would take 6-8 months minimum for the cockpit, internal positions like bombardier, gunners, and the making the entire plane itself would take a year minimum. IIRC, the B-24D currently in IL-2 1946 took some years to make/test. To me, I think they should make a B-17 AI first because B-24 (1946), B-26 (CloD potentially for TF 6.0).

  

Jason stated that he wants to see what TFS has to offer before deciding to compete in an area that they're going to like North Africa, Battle of Britain as people would buy only one game. However, years in the future when they've done everything that they wanted to make and if there is a great interest for North Africa and Battle of Britain to be made for IL-2 GB, then they will, but for now, no. I mean, Cliffs of Dover is part of the IL-2 series, so there's no use complaining about just because it exists.

 

I'm curious about the first part. Why would Battle of Britain have anything to do with the lead up to D-Day?

 

Battle of Britain is a very specific point in time. Depending on the historian its roughly July to October 1940 (though it was largely decided by September 30th). I think some people use it as a short hand for everything after which I'm not sure if you're doing or not.

 

IMHO both the lead up to and the period after D-Day is very interesting. There's a ton of cross channel flying all along the coast conducting strikes and targeting areas both part of the invasion and not part of the invasion plan (so as to not give away the exact plan) and that lead-up particularly in May would be interesting.

Edited by ShamrockOneFive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, Field-Ops said:

I agree with only your observation that it will (indirectly due to planeset difference) compete with CLOD. I do not agree that IL-2 must be tied to the eastern front (first gen IL-2 matured away from the east, and succeeded) or that 4 engined bombers are required for Normandy to work. 

 

True - However, that was the old days when you walked around best buy, fry's or micro center and stumbled upon it. These days you actually have to know what you're looking for. My notion regarding '44 Normandy needing allied heavy bombers because they played a major role:

Quote

On D-Day, over 2,300 sorties were flown by Eighth Air Force heavy bombers in the Normandy and Cherbourg invasion areas, all aimed at neutralizing enemy coastal defenses and front-line troops.

 

Edited by JG7_X-Man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like the mud mover campaigns before and after D-Day itself would get a lot more spotlight in a Normandy expansion than the beaches themselves. Theres a lot more tactical stuff going on several miles south and south-east of the beaches that would be the focus from late 43 to late 44. Normandy beaches and the day itself would see little action. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, ShamrockOneFive said:

I'm curious about the first part. Why would Battle of Britain have anything to do with the lead up to D-Day?

 

Well... For D-Day, the Channel map similar to that of CloD would have to be made and then there would likely be a great demand by the community here to make Battle of Britain aircraft because if you have the Channel map, then you might as well do both D-Day and the Battle of Britain. That's the plan in a future patch for IL-2 1946. However, one thing that I think is anyone's game that I'd like to see is Operation Dragoon.

 

On 6/21/2019 at 4:49 AM, ShamrockOneFive said:

there were people there that loved the original IL-2 and just had no idea there was a second or third generation

That's quite fascinating! I think it's probably the number of planes and maps and the fact that the game is still supported that attracts players and keeps the long time playing still playing the original IL-2, like me been playing the original IL-2 since 2004, but do enjoy CloD and GB.

Share this post


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

... Operation Dragoon.

 

The Luftwaffe presence was minimal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/20/2019 at 8:55 PM, ShamrockOneFive said:

 

D-Day and the whole post Operation Overlord would dovetail nicely with Bodenplatte just as Battle of Moscow leads to Stalingrad leads to Kuban. The aircraft sets could build on each other so nicely that they would help fill gaps in each others' setups.

Exactly. This is the main reason for having Normandy imo, it would expand on the single player content and add more aircraft for more diverse multiplayer missions as well.

Imo there is no downside to doing a Battle of Normandy, it fits nicely with the tactical gameplay the sim is focusing on, and many of the aircraft that flew over Normandy continued in service until the end of the war.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Normandy would be interesting, but I think that something like Sicily would be better for a western front title, as IIRC the Luftwaffe and Regia Aeronautica played a larger role in that campaign. Plus, more Italian planes would be nice.

 

That said, the planeset for Normandy would be more compatible with Bodenplatte due to the shorter time difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

A few drawbacks:

  • Three of the main Luftwaffe aircraft used during the Op. Overlord timeframe (Bf 109 G-6, Fw 190 A-8, Ju 88 A-4) are already released. Owning BoBP, BoM, and the collector Bf 109 G-6 would be virtually mandatory, resulting in a massive bottleneck.
        
  • A Bf 109 G-6 (late production), a Spitfire Mk.IX (C-wing), and the Fw 190 A-6 or A-7 would spark great controversy, and for a good reason - they are merely combinations of already released variants and add absolutely nothing new. Even the much debated BoK Bf 109 G-4 features a higher boost setting and differs in other details from the G-2. Moreover, the A-6 and A-7 wouldn't be representative of the predominantly A-8 equipped fighter units.
       
  • The fighter planeset would be quite repetitive compared with the BoBP one and far from refreshing.
      
  • The post-invasion campaign would be limited to just two months.
       
  • Owing to the massive Allied superiority, all but the dwindling single-engine fighter units of the Luftwaffe were confined to nocturnal missions.
       
  • The game would likely struggle to portray the Allied superiority due to technical limitations.
       
  • The map would have to be even bigger than the BoBP one, but the overall appearance wouldn't differ much.


The Asiatic-Pacific Theater has to be next anyway...

Edited by =27=Davesteu
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, =27=Davesteu said:

A few drawbacks:

  • Three of the main Luftwaffe aircraft used during the Op. Overlord timeframe (Bf 109 G-6, Fw 190 A-8, Ju 88 A-4) are already released. Owning BoBP, BoM, and the collector Bf 109 G-6 would be virtually mandatory, resulting in a massive bottleneck.
        
  • A Bf 109 G-6 (late production), a Spitfire Mk.IX (C-wing), and the Fw 190 A-6 or A-7 would spark great controversy, and for a good reason - they are merely combinations of already released variants and add absolutely nothing new. Even the much debated BoK Bf 109 G-4 features a higher boost setting and differs in other details from the G-2. Moreover, the A-6 and A-7 wouldn't be representative of the predominantly A-8 equipped fighter units.
       
  • The fighter planeset would be quite repetitive compared with the BoBP one and far from refreshing.
      
  • The post-invasion campaign would be limited to just two months.
       
  • Owing to the massive Allied superiority, all but the dwindling single-engine fighter units of the Luftwaffe were confined to nocturnal missions.
       
  • The game would likely struggle to portray the Allied superiority due to technical limitations.
       
  • The map would have to be even bigger than the BoBP one, but the overall appearance wouldn't differ much.


The Asiatic-Pacific Theater has to be next anyway...

 

1-2. This is why we would have to expand on the aircraft and add more unknown or rare types. Germans will run out of aircraft eventually no matter what expansion you go to.

 

3. Only for the Axis in some sense. The Allies could always expand more into the bomber role but even the fighters would be different enough from BoBP (P-47 Razerback, P-51 B/C, etc.)

 

4. Means nothing imo, the total campaign length would be adequate (March/April or earlier - late August 44)

 

5-6. No one seems to mind with Bodenplatte.

 

7. It really wouldn't have to be that much bigger if at all. When did the appearance of the map ever become a factor? Stalingrad and Moscow don't seem all that different to my eyes.

 

8. I'm assuming this is the main reason for not wanting Normandy. In all honesty I can wait for the Pacific now that they decided to go to Western Europe. I wouldn't want Bodenplatte to be left all alone, I prefer at least one more expansion to accompany Bodenplatte before the team moves on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Expanding the Luftwaffe plane set for Normandy by adding 'unknown or rare types'  would make no sense to anyone buying Normandy as a stand-alone, which would deter potential sales. 1C-777 would probably have to do a fundamental rethink of the way they sell aircraft and/or maps to accommodate it. Either sell it along with existing Luftwaffe aircraft, with a discount for those who already own them, or as a map alone, with all the aircraft individually purchasable.  The latter of course would effectively penalise single-player purchasers (the majority) to the advantage of multi-player-only customers, who get to use maps they don't own, unless this multi-player perk was removed.

 

I'd certainly like to see a Normandy map, along with more aircraft relevant to it, but it would have to be economically viable, and that seems difficult if a significant part of the player base already own the aircraft they are most likely to want to fly on it.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Expanding the Luftwaffe plane set for Normandy by adding 'unknown or rare types'  would make no sense to anyone buying Normandy as a stand-alone, which would deter potential sales. 1C-777 would probably have to do a fundamental rethink of the way they sell aircraft and/or maps to accommodate it. Either sell it along with existing Luftwaffe aircraft, with a discount for those who already own them, or as a map alone, with all the aircraft individually purchasable.  The latter of course would effectively penalise single-player purchasers (the majority) to the advantage of multi-player-only customers, who get to use maps they don't own, unless this multi-player perk was removed.

 

I'd certainly like to see a Normandy map, along with more aircraft relevant to it, but it would have to be economically viable, and that seems difficult if a significant part of the player base already own the aircraft they are most likely to want to fly on it.

Simple answer to this is to release more allied aircraft with the pack. Eventually you will always run into this problem of not having enough aircraft for one side. What are the devs gona do when that happens? Just not make any more expansions?

Share this post


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

Simple answer to this is to release more allied aircraft with the pack. Eventually you will always run into this problem of not having enough aircraft for one side. What are the devs gona do when that happens? Just not make any more expansions?

 

How does releasing more allied aircraft for a Normandy pack help people who purchase it as a stand-alone, and want to fly Luftwaffe aircraft?

 

Yes, the devs have a problem, if they wish to continue adding European theatre maps. I can't see how selling a map lacking in content for people who want to be able to fly relevant axis aircraft is any sort of a solution. Not if they want it to be economically viable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldnt want to deviate from the current business model of equal aircraft per side. Its great and remains competitive in the market this sim inhabits. That said it really has put them in a bind over their decision making for the future. The best way I can see it working is release Italy 43/44 next, which gives us unique Axis aircraft to mess with but also give us our P47 and P51 Razorback, possibly introduce some carrier ops with Seafires? 

 

Anyway the next step would be doing something controversial, release Battle of Britain 1940 to get the Normandy map. It wouldnt have to be right away after Italy so the time difference gives more separation from TFM and CloD. This is the only way I see we can squeeze the Normandy map in without the controversy of things like the 109G6, 190A7, or Ju88. Frankly I'd be OK with the G6 being part of the standard pack of Normandy 43/44. Perhaps purchasers of the 109G6 receiving a discount on pre-order, while also seeing things like Wr rockets and Mw50 added to the plane would alleviate community backlash. It would also present a new welcomed challenge of possibly creating two maps for two different time frames (its really just airfield and scenery changes, such as adding the German seawall and bunkers for the 44 map) so a career mode of 43/44 could be done for owners of planes from other packs. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Field-Ops said:

I wouldnt want to deviate from the current business model of equal aircraft per side. Its great and remains competitive in the market this sim inhabits. That said it really has put them in a bind over their decision making for the future. The best way I can see it working is release Italy 43/44 next, which gives us unique Axis aircraft to mess with but also give us our P47 and P51 Razorback, possibly introduce some carrier ops with Seafires? 

 

Anyway the next step would be doing something controversial, release Battle of Britain 1940 to get the Normandy map. It wouldnt have to be right away after Italy so the time difference gives more separation from TFM and CloD. This is the only way I see we can squeeze the Normandy map in without the controversy of things like the 109G6, 190A7, or Ju88. Frankly I'd be OK with the G6 being part of the standard pack of Normandy 43/44. Perhaps purchasers of the 109G6 receiving a discount on pre-order, while also seeing things like Wr rockets and Mw50 added to the plane would alleviate community backlash. It would also present a new welcomed challenge of possibly creating two maps for two different time frames (its really just airfield and scenery changes, such as adding the German seawall and bunkers for the 44 map) so a career mode of 43/44 could be done for owners of planes from other packs. 

This would be a good way to do it imo. Plus it would give me a chance to fly the early 109Es.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A late Bf 109 G-6/AS, being basically the same as a G-14/AS, would be good for Normandy and quite useful for BoBP scenarios as well (it was the one of the most numerous 109 variants in the attack). For the Fw 190... you could get away with an A-6 I suppose, it has 4 x MG 151/20s which are a good upgrade over the A-5, and doesn't have the drag penalty of the A-8, weighting less at the same time, many would have it as the sweetspot mid-lateish war 190 in speed/weight/firepower.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

1-2. This is why we would have to expand on the aircraft and add more unknown or rare types. Germans will run out of aircraft eventually no matter what expansion you go to.

 

3. Only for the Axis in some sense. The Allies could always expand more into the bomber role but even the fighters would be different enough from BoBP (P-47 Razerback, P-51 B/C, etc.)

 

4. Means nothing imo, the total campaign length would be adequate (March/April or earlier - late August 44)

 

5-6. No one seems to mind with Bodenplatte.

 

7. It really wouldn't have to be that much bigger if at all. When did the appearance of the map ever become a factor? Stalingrad and Moscow don't seem all that different to my eyes.

 

8. I'm assuming this is the main reason for not wanting Normandy. In all honesty I can wait for the Pacific now that they decided to go to Western Europe. I wouldn't want Bodenplatte to be left all alone, I prefer at least one more expansion to accompany Bodenplatte before the team moves on.

Agreed!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

A late Bf 109 G-6/AS, being basically the same as a G-14/AS, would be good for Normandy and quite useful for BoBP scenarios as well (it was the one of the most numerous 109 variants in the attack). For the Fw 190... you could get away with an A-6 I suppose, it has 4 x MG 151/20s which are a good upgrade over the A-5, and doesn't have the drag penalty of the A-8, weighting less at the same time, many would have it as the sweetspot mid-lateish war 190 in speed/weight/firepower.

Id rather not see the day where 109's are sold separately by engine modification, yet the same series number. We see several planes in the game with engine modifications as options, rather than a different plane all together. Id rather it be continuing the way it has been. I'd hope to see the 109G14/AS as an engine modification rather than a separate aircraft the same way the 109K, spit IX and V, and 190 series gets their engine mods. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly this would be bad. We cant fly over moscow and here london and paris at the same time? Good luck with that. These cities would be scaled a lot and made into small towns. Like others said before, d-day landing with 3 ships? :rofl: Normandy is the same as battle of britain, it would not work, bodenplatte is already kind of disapointment since it won't simulate air raids over germany. Game works best on the eastern front with tactical level not big picture on the west. Until engine improves of devs find some clever way to make AI bombers a bit simplified so they can put 100 or so of them at the same time, then i don't see how it can work.

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, InProgress said:

Honestly this would be bad. We cant fly over moscow and here london and paris at the same time? Good luck with that. These cities would be scaled a lot and made into small towns. Like others said before, d-day landing with 3 ships? :rofl: Normandy is the same as battle of britain, it would not work, bodenplatte is already kind of disapointment since it won't simulate air raids over germany. Game works best on the eastern front with tactical level not big picture on the west. Until engine improves of devs find some clever way to make AI bombers a bit simplified so they can put 100 or so of them at the same time, then i don't see how it can work.

 

 

The Pacific theatre will suffer the same game performance issues when you place a carrier and a few escort destroyers and then commence an attack on the carrier task force. Once those Ai flak guns start to activate  the game will become a stutter fest , so I personally cannot see the Pacific theatre hitting our computers any time soon without a major game engine modification.  :(

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Field-Ops said:

Id rather not see the day where 109's are sold separately by engine modification, yet the same series number. We see several planes in the game with engine modifications as options, rather than a different plane all together. Id rather it be continuing the way it has been. I'd hope to see the 109G14/AS as an engine modification rather than a separate aircraft the same way the 109K, spit IX and V, and 190 series gets their engine mods. 


I was hoping to see the G-14/AS as a modification too but looks like this wont be the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
21 hours ago, Legioneod said:
On 6/23/2019 at 4:52 PM, =27=Davesteu said:

The Asiatic-Pacific Theater has to be next anyway...

8. I'm assuming this is the main reason for not wanting Normandy. In all honesty I can wait for the Pacific now that they decided to go to Western Europe. I wouldn't want Bodenplatte to be left all alone, I prefer at least one more expansion to accompany Bodenplatte before the team moves on.

No, it's not the main reason. To begin with, Op. Overlord is an unfavourable flight-sim scenario in general and unsuited to the concept of BoX, at least in my book.
The main motive behind the quoted statement is my attitude towards certain things. The "eventual move to the Pacific Theatre" was announced three years ago, but in November 2017 they had to postpone their plans and announced BoBP (+ TC & FC) instead. The argumentation was reasonable and I accepted this step, but there are no excuses after BoBP has been finished. A scenario like the Papua & New Guinea Campaign 1942/43 is within their capabilities and definitely researchable - being highly interested in the Asiatic-Pacific Theatre and having collected a rather large amount of related literature, I feel comfortable saying so.
The time for a cancelation of their Asiatic-Pacific plans has long passed and a further postponement is inacceptable.
Even if I weren't interested in the Asiatic-Pacific Theatre, my stance on this matter would not be a different one.

  

10 hours ago, bzc3lk said:

The Pacific theatre will suffer the same game performance issues when you place a carrier and a few escort destroyers and then commence an attack on the carrier task force. Once those Ai flak guns start to activate  the game will become a stutter fest , so I personally cannot see the Pacific theatre hitting our computers any time soon without a major game engine modification.

True if your perception of the Asiatic-Pacific Theatre is limited to carrier battles, island hopping and naval aviation.

Edited by =27=Davesteu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, =27=Davesteu said:

No, it's not the main reason. To begin with, Op. Overlord is an unfavourable flight-sim scenario in general and unsuited to the concept of BoX, at least in my book.

 

If the main goal of Il2 is to represent tactical aspects of the war, then Normandy fits perfectly. 

Share this post


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

 

If the main goal of Il2 is to represent tactical aspects of the war, then Normandy fits perfectly. 

 

Normandy would be the best what could happen to this game. There are huge synergies with regard to plane usage between BoBP and Normandy, career expansion over two modules and it would perfectly address a huge crowd of new customers who "click" with D-Day and Normandy, but are totally oblivious about the term Bodenplatte.

 

And there is absolutely no need to even think about B17s. All possible on pure tactical level with twin engined bombers like e.g. Marauders, A-20Gs, the occasional Mosquito, the ground-pounding Typhoon in a timeframe from 3/44 - 9/44 on a map featuring southern England and NW-France. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, sevenless said:

 

Normandy would be the best what could happen to this game. There are huge synergies with regard to plane usage between BoBP and Normandy, career expansion over two modules and it would perfectly address a huge crowd of new customers who "click" with D-Day and Normandy, but are totally oblivious about the term Bodenplatte.

 

And there is absolutely no need to even think about B17s. All possible on pure tactical level with twin engined bombers like e.g. Marauders, A-20Gs, the occasional Mosquito, the ground-pounding Typhoon in a timeframe from 3/44 - 9/44 on a map featuring southern England and NW-France. 

Exactly, Normandy would fit very well in BoX and it would be a very good addition to go with Bodenplatte.

Edited by Legioneod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/25/2019 at 2:10 AM, sevenless said:

Normandy would be the best what could happen to this game.

 

On 6/25/2019 at 2:16 AM, Legioneod said:

Exactly, Normandy would fit very well in BoX and it would be a very good addition to go with Bodenplatte.

 

I don't get you people... Normandy is a huge thing and if you are going to call your game Normandy then better show most important part of it, which is dday. Other thing is that many people are simply sick of it already, Normandy is overused in every ww2 game. 

 

Another problem is engine limitations. If you are doing something then do it right, making Normandy TODAY is pretty much impossible unless you take a lot of compromises. I highly doubt paris and london can be made. Invasion fleet is a dream, no infantry on the beach. It would be simply empty. As much as I prefer ostfront, Normandy would be nice but not now, not untill big cities can be made and lots of objects won't affect fps so much. 

 

Also Normandy would be a direct competition with dcs which probably is not something these companies want. 

 

I believe that devs actually know all this and we wont see it anytime soon. I want to see it but not now. Wish they would show something new and fresh instead of "mainstream history", something that is not represent much. Sofia, Italy, Dutch east India, new guinea, Finland etc.

Edited by InProgress
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


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

I don't get you people... Normandy is a huge thing and if you are going to call your game Normandy then better show most important part of it, which is dday. Other thing is that many people are simply sick of it already, Normandy is overused in every ww2 game. 

 

To each his own, I guess. Nope, there is neither sickness nor is there any engine limitation which would exclude that scenery. The contrary is the case and additional important factors which would boost both new Sales from new customers who are oblivious about Bodenplatte and sales from existing customers would come into play due to synergies with BoBP and Normandy expanding SP and supplementing the ETO planeset.

 

Anyways we most likely will learn what will happen in the second half of this year. A half assed PTO could kill them and it is highly doubtfull if this engine could do carrier operations properly, let alone handle the necessary amount of planes in parallel.

Share this post


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

The contrary is the case and additional important factors which would boost both new Sales from new customers who are oblivious about Bodenplatte and sales from existing customers would come into play due to synergies with BoBP and Normandy expanding SP and supplementing the ETO planeset.

Completely disagree, new players, especially these who are not into sims yet, after watching this huge invasion fleet made of 6 ships and empty beach would be disappointed on so many levels and most likely leave. Great actor in bad movie won't make it successful. 

 

If engine won't work on Pacific then it won't work in Normandy. I just want to see it done right, not forced because it's famous even tho engine won't be able to make it really fun. 

 

And my opinion is the same about Pacific, especially midway. I just don't see it. If we do Pacific then I think all these topics people made before about new guinea is the best choice. But we will see what new title devs announce soon, personally I hope it's new ostfront expansion 😜

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...