Jump to content
sinned

Next Theater Announcement Date

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Oyster_KAI said:

Hi, could you please explain this for me? I'm just begin to use PWCG.
******
I've almost done my Kuban fighter career(bf-109), the Kuban campaign is near the end.
My squad and team mate was always been dead easily, now they are all new face, nobody have 10+ air combat victory.
I wont be sad for their death, because they just like robot, nobody is my comrade.😭
I miss the strong AI in IL-2 1946, they can really cover you, help you, and make a perfect bombing.

 

I'll let Pat himself explain it:

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Duplicated Post

 

Edited by J5_Spyboy
duplicate

Share this post


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

The engine will last as long as it continues to receive upgrades, just like it has for the last 10 years. There's no reason to believe that "this engine" will need to be replaced soon.

 

"I don't believe in building from complete scratch these days. [The graphics] may be from scratch. Everything else would be an evolution of sorts. That is the safest bet for us to stay alive for a long time."

 

 

I'm thinking the PTO is the only logical choice. What sells this game are the planes. For the European/Mediteranean/Eastern fronts, most of the planes have been made already unless you want to go heavy into bombers like the B17, B24 or Lanc. That only leaves 2 options for the next game... Korea or PTO. With Korea, you're pretty much limited.. Sabers or Migs. So if I were a developer purely on a sales parameter. The PTO therefor would be the most logical choice with the widest variety of planes IMHO..my 2 cents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see the Eastern Front completed before moving elsewhere. Firstly I'd like to see the Smolensk map incorporated. This has the bonus of being able to be used in two campaigns, in 1941 and 1944. New planes could include the Ju87B, HS123 and I-153 for 1941 and Yak 3, La7 series and late IL2 series for 1944.

 

I think this also 'joins more dots' than moving onto the Pacific or Africa just yet. It means you can fly from July 41 through to 45 (using Bodenplatte).

 

Eventually I'd like to see Lvov/Poland/Berlin and most definitely the Leningrad/Baltic area incorporated as this can then include the Finnish as well.

 

What the game is crying out for more than anything though is some Soviet bombers, whether flyable or not. SB2's, DB3's etc to fill the skies up a bit.

 

 

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, J28w-Broccoli said:

Good god no.

 

This

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, let's have a couple more other theaters, like Pacific and Western Front before getting back to the Eastern Front. Then let's alternate Eastern Front/Western Front/Pacific/Mediterranean/North Africa/etc. Just don't stick to a single theater for several consecutive updates. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, SiPinto said:

I'd like to see the Eastern Front completed before moving elsewhere. Firstly I'd like to see the Smolensk map incorporated. This has the bonus of being able to be used in two campaigns, in 1941 and 1944. New planes could include the Ju87B, HS123 and I-153 for 1941 and Yak 3, La7 series and late IL2 series for 1944.

 

I think this also 'joins more dots' than moving onto the Pacific or Africa just yet. It means you can fly from July 41 through to 45 (using Bodenplatte).

 

Eventually I'd like to see Lvov/Poland/Berlin and most definitely the Leningrad/Baltic area incorporated as this can then include the Finnish as well.

 

What the game is crying out for more than anything though is some Soviet bombers, whether flyable or not. SB2's, DB3's etc to fill the skies up a bit.

 

 


That's a sure fire way to never get me to spend another dime on IL-2

The last thing IL-2 needs is exhaustive nearly duplicate titles that don't offer a significant advancement in experience and game play. 

BOS set the base, BOM offered earlier aircraft, BOK introduced some initial naval aspects, BOBP offered jet aircraft and the later war and western front scenarios...

The only thing more eastern front titles will do is just repeat roughly the same experience as BOS/M/K but with later aircraft. 

 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, 357th_Dog said:

The only thing more eastern front titles will do is just repeat roughly the same experience as BOS/M/K but with later aircraft.

Same thing can be said about pretty much any other theater.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, SiPinto said:

then include the Finnish as well.


This is really needed. 
Do 17 and a lot of slow rubbish secondhand planes and a good place to fly Hurricanes. 
my life would be complete. 
I hope I am wrong, but I think PTO aint gonna happened next. I think they feel it gonna be too expensive

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for Pacific. It is also true that late war scenario for VVS would do them a justice by having best toys to play with. As Germans,Brits and Americans do.

  I'm genuinely interested in how would devs digitally reincarnate Yak-9U with its "troublesome" VK-107A engine.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

  I'm genuinely interested in how would devs digitally reincarnate Yak-9U with its "troublesome" VK-107A engine.

 

I’ll trade you 1 troublesome VK-107A for a robust, tough as nails, reliable Allison or R2800.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

I'd like to see the Eastern Front completed before moving elsewhere. Firstly I'd like to see the Smolensk map incorporated. This has the bonus of being able to be used in two campaigns, in 1941 and 1944. New planes could include the Ju87B, HS123 and I-153 for 1941 and Yak 3, La7 series and late IL2 series for 1944.

 

I think this also 'joins more dots' than moving onto the Pacific or Africa just yet. It means you can fly from July 41 through to 45 (using Bodenplatte).

 

Eventually I'd like to see Lvov/Poland/Berlin and most definitely the Leningrad/Baltic area incorporated as this can then include the Finnish as well.

 

What the game is crying out for more than anything though is some Soviet bombers, whether flyable or not. SB2's, DB3's etc to fill the skies up a bit.

Agreed. I'd like to see something like IL-2: Battle of Barbarossa if the devs are unable to go to the Pacific. I would love to see a map covering Belarus, Smolensk, Lvov/northern Ukraine. I mean, what other ww2 game has a Belarus map, save for IL-2 1946 mods? The time frame would be from June to September 1941 and would lead into the Battle of Moscow, and it the plane set would include aircraft that we could also use for BOM. The map could also be used for a 1944 front because for many of the BoK planes, we can use them in 1943- early 44 battles, all we need are the maps.

 

A 3rd party team is working on a Finland map, so I think a Winter War to Continuation War from 1939-1944 Career could be well feasible; with the map mostly done, that means more time can be spent on planes and Pilot Career. The plane set could also include BoM planes as well.

 

I think Bodenplatte was a decision to include WW2 planes that most people were familiar with like the P-47, P-51, P-38, Me-262, covering an area that hadn't been covered in a while and going from late summer 1944- early 1945. I think they could also do a late summer 1944- early 1945 Eastern front with the late war Russian planes. It's too soon for the devs to jump right to the Battle of Berlin after Bodenplatte.

 

Even though we have BoS, BOM, and BoK, there's still more to the Eastern front of WW2 IMO that still needs to be covered.

Edited by Novice-Flyer
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

I’ll trade you 1 troublesome VK-107A for a robust, tough as nails, reliable Allison or R2800.

No deal Gambit. I want to see Yak-9U shaking and smoking at 3200 rpm 😁🙃

Share this post


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

No deal Gambit. I want to see Yak-9U shaking and smoking at 3200 rpm 😁🙃

 

That’s what mean. :)

Share this post


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

a robust, tough as nails, reliable Allison 

 

Well, indeed I would really like a late P-39Q in Soviet insignia 😛

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alexmarine28 said:

 

Well, indeed I would really like a late P-39Q in Soviet insignia 😛


Don't forget the P-63, that nice hydraulic coupling supercharger with water injection at the allied side too ^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's each to their own of course. But my interest is in single player campaigns, rather than multiplayer.

 

With IL2 46 it was possible to fly from 1940 through to May 45 in West AND East Europe (albeit with the outstanding Enjoyr add-ons)....and from 1941 to August 45 in the Pacific.

 

For me, a full, dynamic and complete campaign spanning the war from beginning to end is more important than a battle here and a battle there.

 

That the devs have made it possible to link the maps so far to make one ongoing campaign would seem to suggest that will be the case in the future as well, so whilst a Pacific theater would be great, it would be, by definition, totally stand alone. 

 

I'd sooner they finish what they've started first.....and as mentioned, add in some larger Soviet bombers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:


Don't forget the P-63, that nice hydraulic coupling supercharger with water injection at the allied side too ^^

 

We just need Jason announcment of the next title then: Il-2 Battle of Manchuria (title need to be worked on...)

 

Does it count as a Pacific module? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Alexmarine28 said:

 

We just need Jason announcment of the next title then: Il-2 Battle of Manchuria (title need to be worked on...)

 

 

Battle of Nevahgonnahappen

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pacific is fine as long as it stays in it's lane. That is to say, of secondary importance to pretty much everything in Europe. You could actually say of tertiary importance if you factor in MTO.

 

Stay in your lane Pacific and we will get along just fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CUJO_1970 said:

Pacific is fine as long as it stays in it's lane. That is to say, of secondary importance to pretty much everything in Europe. You could actually say of tertiary importance if you factor in MTO.

 

Stay in your lane Pacific and we will get along just fine.

 

He's here all week folks.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gambit21 said:

 

He's here all week folks.

 

Yep, enjoy the veal - along with the upcoming ETO expansion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CUJO_1970 said:

 

Yep, enjoy the veal - along with the upcoming ETO expansion.

 

lol

Almost typed the veal thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gambit21 said:

 

lol

Almost typed the veal thing.

 

hehe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, No.322_LuseKofte said:

Do 17 and a lot of slow rubbish secondhand planes and a good place to fly Hurricanes. 
my life would be complete. 
 

 

I am with you there, bring it on, who needs deep Blue ocean, sandy beaches and sunshine, Finnish front is the place to be.:drinks:

 

Hot and dusty in summer, freezing cold in winter, gives a nice variety of interesting conditions, not to mention cool aircraft and missions.;)

 

Come on Jason, let it go, stop trying to keep it all to yourself, where are we going next?

 

 

Wishing you all the very best, Pete.:biggrin:

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


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

 

I am with you there, bring it on, who needs deep Blue ocean, sandy beaches and sunshine, Finnish front is the place to be.:drinks:

 

Hot and dusty in summer, freezing cold in winter, gives a nice variety of interesting conditions, not to mention cool aircraft and missions.;)

 

 

 

 

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, CUJO_1970 said:

 

Yep, enjoy the veal - along with the upcoming ETO expansion.

 

My wallet and I will enjoy that one from afar.  Maybe some nice collector planes come out of it though.

Edited by J28w-Broccoli

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Battle of Rabaul from Autumn 1943. Attractive planeset for both sides. 

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I'm not seeing it where people are saying this engine is tapped out. The main engine issues that I'm seeing are the AI efficiency, and the overly simplistic engine model. Neither of those require the flight engine, or most of the prior work done to be dispensed with. The AI logic and design efficiency in particular should be very independent of the rest of the engine, and would improve the product as a whole. 

 

We are nowhere near the point we got to in the original Il-2 when the basic functions of the engine were starting to break down. Does anyone remember the jitterbug effect you'd get once you hit a high enough altitude? 

 

The only real reason I could see doing a 'new' engine would be an attempt to resell the prior releases in 'new shiny' form, and that would diminish the general value of the games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think rewriting the whole engine is necessary. Some under the hood overhaul - yes, hopefully will be done in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Nibbio said:

Devs built a very good simulation, which can be quite engaging in multiplayer, if you care about that sort of thing, but there's almost no single player game, with the exception of the career mode, which feels like an afterthought.

 

New scenarios and new planes are not going to cut it. It's probably necessary to churn out this stuff to keep the company afloat, since many of us will buy new planes and maps regardless, but it does not address the fundamental flaw:

 

THERE IS PRECIOUS LITTLE GAME TO KEEP SINGLE PLAYERS INTERESTED AND ENGAGED.

 

The capability of the engine, as in number of planes in the air, is mostly irrelevant. Air armadas of bombers and escorts would not make an ounce of difference if SP missions always follow the same boring pattern. Fly to point A, strafe or bomb or dogfight, return to base chased by brain dead and suicidal enemies, land, rinse, repeat.

 

This project needs a leap of creativity, some good ideas to allow the players to do something interesting with these beautiful planes, give players the feeling that the missions are useful to reach an objective, give players agency, a sense that their efforts are meaningful.

 

As a bare minimum career mission variety should be increased, whereas at the moment it seems the career is largely a forgotten backwater.  

 

 

14 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

The engine is showing it's age, be sure.  To move on to the theater that Jason, and many others myself included want next, the Pacific, will require a new engine, or a seriously improved current one.  This engine will simply fall to it's knees trying to replicate fleet actions like say, the battle of Midway, or the vast numbers of ships taking part at Okinawa.  The only way to go to the Pacific with the current engine would be to go with a land based scenario that emphasizes what this engine does best, small unit tactical missions.  That would leave us with New Guinea or Burma.  If you want carriers, you need a new engine.

 

 

What is the basis for everyone to state the engine has reached its limit? What I can tell, there isn't a lot of difference between the first release in the last release of the game. It is essentially more of the same. Most of the development has been with FM. Much of the demand is for more content (planes and maps). I seriously doubt the engine is anywhere near its potential. Each plane is meticulously crafted, the environment is also well made. There is absolutely no way that the engine could not create more detail maps etc,... However, the game is already demanding. 

 

If single player experience is what you want, then they need to stop making more content and focus on SP experience. Like many game development companies, they rely on mods to compliment their own content. You can argue wither or not this is good or bad, but these two factors certainly play into the decision making of the development team. A "smarter" AI takes time to create and with a company with limited resources a sacrifice will have to be made. Do you want more content (maps and planes) or do you want a more detail campaign experience? If you want the latter, then you will have to forgo on your desire for more content. Although, a developer than can design a FM may not be well suited for creating a immersive SP experience. It may not be possible for them to switch gears like that. A larger question and an important one, will be people be willing to buy a DLC that enhances the SP experience? When it comes down to it, that is the bottom line. They need to produce content that will sell. moreover, it would be difficult for them to offer early access; AI behavior can be buggy as heck, so the development will be longer and the cash flow small while in development. 

 

BTW, you cannot re-write an engine. If they develop a new engine, the old content will remain on this engine, while new content will be on another. In otherwise, an entirely new game. The only reason they would need a new engine, if it will optimized the game better making it more accessible for causal computer owners. 

Edited by IV./JG51-Lanze_vonHaltung

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, they have done a great job of optimising the Graphics Engine on Il2 BoX series given it is currently on DirectX 11.  I think further down the track with all these juicy and more affordable multicore CPU's floating about would be for the engine to be migrated towards Vulcan like DCS is or, DirectX 12, preferably Vulcan as it gives you more platform leverage and seems to run better.

 

Personally, it would be nice to also see Il2 run stable when one is using Foreated Rendering.  This would be a boon for next gen VR headsets without the need to use brute force rendering to scale up the target render requirements.

 

AI, Physics, Flight Models and other computational intensive areas would benefit greatly from being distributed across available CPU Cores and Threads.  Microsoft might also help here with the next release of Windows 10 improving CPU Scheduling capabilities and also prioritizing better performing cores initially.  Or with Vulcan and Valves help - allow for Il2 to run on an OS that has a better performing scalable kernel like, cough, Linux.

 

Just some thoughts.  Still, AI has come along a bit since the beginning of the year and the Pilot Physiology is also applied to them too which is nice.  AI team work, tactics and player to AI communication need work though.👍

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


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

Battle of Rabaul from Autumn 1943. Attractive planeset for both sides. 

 

Attacking the bay is one of those classic scenarios like the attack on the bismark or pearl harbor.  Really fun scenarios and the islands make for a great theatre with all of the classics.  I just think it might be difficult for them to build japanese planes with the lack of documentation and examples.  

 

There is a lot of interest though and it would give them an excuse to build american heavy bombers.  carriers and the zero are huge ‘selling points.’

 

Also now that we have fc we need that zero so that we can determine who would win in a camel vs zero dogfight!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

S!

 

@IV./JG51-Lanze_vonHaltung The engine is incapable of having AI in MP in any significant numbers before the game grinds down to a stuttery and laggy mess. Wonder why Finnish MP server reduced number of AI planes covering depots or removes them altogether when certain amount of people are on the server? Or why there are no AI battles on the ground or convoys? Because of the performance hit. Tested so many times.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, LLv34_Flanker said:

Wonder why Finnish MP server reduced number of AI planes covering depots or removes them altogether when certain amount of people are on the server? Or why there are no AI battles on the ground or convoys? Because of the performance hit. Tested so many times.

This.

 

They already jumped the hurdle of ships' limited rendering distance (and there are some LOD issues with it still), but optimization of the engine is still needed to get decent PTO action. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Carriers 

&

 

Edited by RAY-EU
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What ever happened to the ships. Were they too complicated to feature in the career mode?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, LLv34_Temuri said:

This.

 

They already jumped the hurdle of ships' limited rendering distance (and there are some LOD issues with it still), but optimization of the engine is still needed to get decent PTO action. 

It would benefit to the whole GB series not just PTO!

That's something they'll have to tackle at some point if they want to continue expanding  to popular theatres and planesets.

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...