What kind of module would you like to see after BoN?

[Deicide]

I've personally decided after the news I'm not buying anymore until PTO. There are a few scripted campaigns I might grab on sale otherwise not anymore. As an American the European theater is meh to me. Its so over done and over saturated with the same 10 vehicles. I love the P-51, Spitfire, Yak and Bf109 as much as the next person but at the same time, I can play either of those across like 5 games I own right now. If I want to play PTO I've gotta go back to IL2 1946 or jump on some arcade game. That's my 2 cents.

Edited February 2, 2022 by CrazyJow

[Cynic_Al]

On 9/13/2020 at 8:16 AM, Eisenfaustus said:

you can pick as many as you want. 

 

'All/None' have not been made selectable options.  'None' could have represented those believing that development efforts are better directed elsewhere; without it you're just asking a leading question.

[kendo]

Of those listed I'd be interested in 3 (well, 4 counting the Battle of Britain, but unfortunately that's a non-starter)

 

So either of the two Pacific options or Italy.

 

Would love to see carriers at any stage of the Pacific war.

[Eisenfaustus]

11 hours ago, Cynic_Al said:

 

'All/None' have not been made selectable options.  'None' could have represented those believing that development efforts are better directed elsewhere; without it you're just asking a leading question.

All isn‘t needed as you can simply select all - yet you are right that an additional option „other“ would have made sense. 
What other scenario would you have favoured?

[Deicide]

22 hours ago, Eisenfaustus said:

All isn‘t needed as you can simply select all - yet you are right that an additional option „other“ would have made sense. 
What other scenario would you have favoured?

I wouldn't bother that person (Cynic_Al) is just a troll if you go and actually look at their profile, it is nothing but troll comments. Literally every comment is disparaging or with a bad sarcastic undertone. Personally I've blocked them. I would suggest you as well.

[Cynic_Al]

On 2/2/2022 at 12:20 PM, Eisenfaustus said:

What other scenario would you have favoured?

 

I should have thought I'd made that obvious.  Software development is not just about churning-out new content.

[Cynic_Al]

10 hours ago, CrazyJow said:

I wouldn't bother that person (Cynic_Al) is just a troll if you go and actually look at their profile, it is nothing but troll comments. Literally every comment is disparaging or with a bad sarcastic undertone. Personally I've blocked them. I would suggest you as well.

 

I accept this validation gratefully, with the exception that I reject 'disparaging' in place of 'pragmatic'.

[KG100_Brannon]

Mid to late Pacific land ops especially for the RAF SEAC.

[HAWKEYES007]

Landing on the Enterprise（CV-6）is my dream ?

[Props]

7 hours ago, HAWKEYES007 said:

Landing on the Enterprise（CV-6）is my dream ?

Me too! But I'd gladly accept landing on a Yorktown or Essex class too. Even an escort carrier. Or 2....?

[messsucher]

Really would like to do VR carrier landing.

[Feldgrun]

Pacific after BoN. I'd recommend alternating releases between Pacific & European battles: Guadalcanal, 1943 Italy, Midway, 1944-45 Eastern Front, New Guinea, etc. 1CGS really needs to get players excited again, and bring in new blood. With DCS likely coming out with the Pacific, this game may stall with a release of the same map with another version of a Bf109 & Yak. I vote Guadalcanal, as did most of you. It may be a long map, as the distance from the US base on Henderson Field in Guadalcanal to the Japanese base at Buin Airfield in Bougainville is 565km, which is bigger than other IL-2 maps, but it's a lot of sea, which may be easier to map. There were also a lot of smaller Japanese air bases on surrounding islands, which could be added as well. It would be land based, so development wouldn't, for this map, include carriers. It could include a lot of ships, which would make great targets and AA platforms.

[messsucher]

Making pacific without carriers would be just insulting.

[Cynic_Al]

9 hours ago, messsucher said:

Making pacific without carriers would be just insulting.

 

Given the distances involved in this theatre, it's difficult to imagine anyone having the patience to fly back to their carrier, even if they survive their objective intact.  While offline-mode players could use the time-cheat keys,  multiplayer servers would need to create condensed, non-historic airstart maps with enemy fleets separated by only a few minutes of flying time.

[messsucher]

11 minutes ago, Cynic_Al said:

 

Given the distances involved in this theatre, it's difficult to imagine anyone having the patience to fly back to their carrier, even if they survive their objective intact.  While offline-mode players could use the time-cheat keys,  multiplayer servers would need to create condensed, non-historic airstart maps with enemy fleets separated by only a few minutes of flying time.

 

Not really, they could do non-historic distances between the fleets. It works pretty well, that has been done in SEOW and I have flew such. You want to destroy the enemy carrier and protect your own carrier, especially the latter, since there is nothing where you can land if your carrier get destroyed.

[Cynic_Al]

3 hours ago, messsucher said:

Not really, they could do non-historic distances between the fleets.

 

I can't tell whether you're agreeing or disagreeing.

[messsucher]

1 hour ago, Cynic_Al said:

 

I can't tell whether you're agreeing or disagreeing.

 

Haha, I am agreeing with you, but the solution to that is to move fleets non-historically close.

 

I by the way had a plan to do personal achievement and fly historically accurately long carrier mission because of the HC realism factor. Just imagine flying for hours with nothing but sea around you, and then take that one dive and fly back to land on the carrier ?

Edited February 6, 2022 by messsucher

[=gRiJ=Roman-]

On 2/6/2022 at 5:24 PM, Cynic_Al said:

 

Given the distances involved in this theatre, it's difficult to imagine anyone having the patience to fly back to their carrier, even if they survive their objective intact.  While offline-mode players could use the time-cheat keys,  multiplayer servers would need to create condensed, non-historic airstart maps with enemy fleets separated by only a few minutes of flying time.

The Devs need to find the way to speed the x8 compressed time to much, much higher. I have no idea what the technical part of that would involve though.

[Drum]

They could make (easy for me to say) a "Warp Line" which is placed on map by the mission maker.  The warp line reduces a plane's fuel load the proper amount for each plane type's cruise speed and load configuration, before respawning it from another air spawn location.  Vice versa on the return flight with all acquired damage.

[messsucher]

1 hour ago, Drum said:

They could make (easy for me to say) a "Warp Line" which is placed on map by the mission maker.  The warp line reduces a plane's fuel load the proper amount for each plane type's cruise speed and load configuration, before respawning it from another air spawn location.  Vice versa on the return flight with all acquired damage.

 

That is an interesting idea. What it would do is to require people to take big load of fuel. But what it could do also is to make players to camp those warp gates, if they know where those are. Also with real squadrons there would be two additional hassles in making the wing(s) fly in formation. Once after each warp, and I can't see that enjoyable much less historic.

 

In the end practical solution is to just move the fleets non-historically close to each other. That way the bombers can be intercepted too.

[Algy-Lacey]

I have just spent an enjoyable few hours looking through books and the internet at what allied and axis aircraft types flew over Italy starting with Operation Husky and then the allied landings at Salerno up to the fighting around Monte Cassino.

 

This potential 'Battle of Italy' would be my favourite theatre of WWII for 3 reasons:

 

1) The Map, as far south and west as Malta, covering Sicily and Italy as far north as Rome. Varied terrain with vegetation and buildings different to anywhere else covered thus far.

 

2a) The potential planeset, including a variant of Bf109 and a Spitfire... for newcomers who don't have other modules. UK and Commonwealth, USAF, Luftwaffe, Regia Aeronautica and Aeronautica Nazionale Repubblicana:

 

Allied:

Spitfire Mk Vc (Aboukir tropical filter or Vokes tropical filter, or both!) with 4 x 20mm Hispano cannon as option
Curtis P-40F or P-40L
North American A-36 Apache
Bristol Beaufighter
Westland Lysander

 

Collector's plane:
Spitfire Mk VIII

 

Axis:

Messerschmitt Bf109 G4 or G6 Tropical version
Focke Wulf FW190 F/Trop or FW190 G/Trop
Macchi MC205 Veltro
Reggiane Re2001 Falco II
Fieseler Fi 156 Storch

 

Collector's plane:
Fiat G.55 Centauro

 

2b) The existing aircraft that we have from other modules... Spitfire Mk IX, Hurricane Mk II, P-51B Mustang, Curtis P-40E, Lockheed P-38J,  C-47, A-20, B-25 etc

Bf109 G6, FW190 A5, Bf110 G, Mc202 Folgore, Ju88A, He111, Ju87 D-3, Hs129, Ju52 etc

 

3) The possibility of having naval battles and testing out the tech for torpedo bombers (Beaufighter) and aircraft carriers without the module solely depending on them. For example supply convoys to Malta. Aircraft carriers could bring naval aircraft such as the Fairey Swordfish (the good old 'Stringbag')

 

I am excited by this prospect more than any other potential module, including the Pacific or late war Eastern front - and looking at the votes, it is second favourite only to Early Pacific Carrier Ops.

 

Happy Landings,

Algy-Lacey

 

 

 

[Panzerlang]

I'm LW-centric, so anything that allows a full-war career from as early to as late as possible. It's not bad now though and with BoN will be almost perfect.

[BornToBattle]

This makes me wonder as there is an official poll asking which scenario for yet another Battle of Kuban people would prefer to see.

[Icehandcarpocrates]

I know that this poll reflects personal choices and likes, but I think that there is a pre-WW2 scenario that has been neglected for a long time, and it's quite important because now it is considered the first modern war in the 20th Century: the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939).

 

- It was like a rehearsal for WW2. Although all countries declared to be neutral, Germany and Italy supported the fascist rebels, and the USSR supported the Republican government. Many volunteers from USA, UK, France, USSR joined the Republican side, including many pilots.

- First time where modern design single-planes fighters met (particularly the I-16 and the Bf-109 which proved to be more efficient than older designs as the I-15, the Fiat CR, etc.). Besides the Spanish pilots, many German and Soviet pilots got their expertise and become Aces during the Spanish Civil War. Some new developments were tested during this war: the flaps, at least in the I-16, new sights for aiming, new cannons, engines, breathing system for high altitudes, etc.)

- First place and time were Stukas were used (as far as I know).

- First time where modern war aerial tactics were tested (specially for the German aviation, the Legion Condor, who used Spain and the fight for Franco's fascism as a test ground for new techniques, like the first time of ruthless bombing of cities and massive civilian casualties effect).

- I can also mention new fighter tactics, like replacing the classic Victor formation for a Leader-Wingman schema, etc.

 

I think this scenario could be very fascinating for everyone interested in History, airplane development, and pilot experiences.

 

[=gRiJ=Roman-]

PACIFIC! Too long waiting ...

[DN308]

I’ll hold my breath until I have what I expect!

LOL

[ITAF_Rani]

In my opinion the scenarios  possible are Pacific,East 44-45, Italy 43..

All 3 are cool ( of course I prefer Italy), but all 3 show unique aspects and deserve to play...

I m sure the Devs they ll do their best in terms to have new cool map and stunning planes like always.

Maybe we ll get same disclosure after Normandy map release, so we could receive news around November 2022.

In any case Normandy will be great and the next DLC I m sure will be also a beautiful scenario.

IL2 GB is the best ww2 aerial combat sim and with other next DLC  will be always at the top..

 

 

 

[kendo]

Regarding the Pacific options (definitely my preferred theatre for the next release), I was wondering if a possible way to do it would be to release a non-carrier option first, maybe Guadalcanal, and then have the carriers as purchasable content later - one IJN and one USN?

 

So, it would work like the DCS Supercarrier approach. And having them available as individual 'collector' purchases may be a better development option for them considering the amount of work involved - especially if they were to model interior hangars, lifts, etc. Animated ground crew...!   ?  

 

(and I'm aware the stated issue is Japanese aircraft info which this route won't change....just the idea excites me...!)

[Lupus]

A campaign involving carrier ops gets my vote.  I seriously miss the challenge of landing on a carrier and fighting over the pacific.

 

I realize there are serious challenges to get completely accurate Japanese aircraft flight characteristics.   Honestly, I'd be happy for them to SWAG it.  Get as close as they reasonably can and guess what they can't find.  I don't need functioning aircraft elevators on the carriers.

 

I mean, this isn't a study level sim.  So I see no problems with the Dev's taking some liberties and 'guessing' based on what they can determine when completely accurate information is missing or not readily available.  Besides, it's not like they can't patch a flight model later when more accurate information becomes available to them.

[357th_KW]

On 4/25/2022 at 3:46 AM, kendo said:

Regarding the Pacific options (definitely my preferred theatre for the next release), I was wondering if a possible way to do it would be to release a non-carrier option first, maybe Guadalcanal, and then have the carriers as purchasable content later - one IJN and one USN?

 

So, it would work like the DCS Supercarrier approach. And having them available as individual 'collector' purchases may be a better development option for them considering the amount of work involved - especially if they were to model interior hangars, lifts, etc. Animated ground crew...!   ?  

 

(and I'm aware the stated issue is Japanese aircraft info which this route won't change....just the idea excites me...!)

Most of the land campaigns in the Pacific had some carrier involvement as well.  New Guinea, the Solomons, the Philippines and Okinawa all had carriers involved at various points.  It seems like you could build any of those and then add carriers as you go.

[jojy47jojyrocks]

Pacific or the Mediterranean...both are quite rare.