No infantry modeled...

[Trooper117]

Sad to see that infantry will not make it into the game.

I certainly didn't expect to see a massed infantry assault going in, but it would have been good to see panicked occupants of vehicles debussing and legging it for their lives when we were ground strafing (as per old IL2)...

Just brewing up a line of trucks or tanks will seem a little sterile, no matter how good the explosions are.

[easyTarget]

i think we should be more patient, later if things go well they add more life on ground, this had been said before by the developers that they have to find balance between the power of regular PC and objects rendered in real time. Of course in flight sim there is a stress on air objects then ground. Personally i would love to see soldiers running for cover or from cars or jumping of trains, even if they were just simplified entities without physics and shadows, to save rendering resources. But i have no idea how is the engine coded so its just wish. have a nice day

[JG13_opcode]

Sad to see that infantry will not make it into the game.

I certainly didn't expect to see a massed infantry assault going in, but it would have been good to see panicked occupants of vehicles debussing and legging it for their lives when we were ground strafing (as per old IL2)...

Just brewing up a line of trucks or tanks will seem a little sterile, no matter how good the explosions are.

Honestly, most of the people that buy this game will spend 99% of their time at altitudes where people on the ground would be too small to be rendered on screen.

 

It's a good decision on their part not to include a feature that most of the buyers will never have meaningful interaction with. They can always add infantry models later in a patch or expansion.

 

You can always pretend that your mighty Soviet bullets are simply vaporizing the fascist invaders before they have time to get out of the vehicle.

Edited June 24, 2013 by JG13Doggles

[Trooper117]

Try telling that to pilots who live for ground attack missions.. Of which there was many when we played the large IL2 online wars years ago.

I'm fully aware its a flight sim game not Call of Duty, but it was the little things like that which was a nice touch and added to the beauty of the game. Also pilots jumping out of damaged aircraft on landing after a prang or their aircraft was on fire... 

Still, we shall see!

[Guest deleted@1562]

Having infantry in DCS;World makes CAS so much more fun. Or flying the Huey cringing at the sound of AK rounds hitting the fuselage. At least some guys abadoning vehicles like we had in IL2  would make me happy.

[Foobar]

Honestly, most of the people that buy this game will spend 99% of their time at altitudes where people on the ground would be too small to be rendered on screen.

 

Pure speculation.

[Rjel]

Having infantry in DCS;World makes CAS so much more fun. Or flying the Huey cringing at the sound of AK rounds hitting the fuselage. At least some guys abadoning vehicles like we had in IL2  would make me happy.

 

Add to that maybe people exiting from buildings on an airfield. They wouldn't have to be visible any longer than what we have in IL2 now.

[CrazySchmidt]

I spend a lot of time time down on the ground with IL-2, ground attack missions are one of my favs.

 

A presence of infantry greatly helps with immersion IMHO.

 

CS.

[EagleEye]

A presence of infantry greatly helps with immersion IMHO.

Absolutely!

It`s odd to look at airfields and no humans are there. Unfortunatley human models will raise the object count.

Looking great for screenshots(courtesy of Scoobe SIMHQ):

Edited June 27, 2013 by EagleEye

[Uufflakke]

As a lowflyer I like to see all these kind of ground activities.

In IL-2 it was fun to see the soldiers running away from their trucks during some strafing.

 

I understand that they won't add crew and troops in BoS at the moment (deadline).

But I hope it will be added later when BoS becomes succesful. And I prefer to see animated ground crew and infantry.

 

Not fair to compare but in FSX the animated ground crew looks great.

 

At 3min27s:

 

Edited June 27, 2013 by Uufflakke

[kestrel79]

I don't think this is that big of a deal. Warthunder has IMO the best looking low level graphics for ground attack that I have seen in a flight sim and they do this without people.

 

I really like how in WT you can see the dust rising from the tank columns way in the distance or from high above. It also runs at a very high fps with AAA and flak shooting at you so it's very immersive not to have any slowdown when you fire your weapons at low alt. DCS always loses 20fps for me when strafing. In IL2 and DCS it is always really hard for me to find the ground targets from afar.

[Trooper117]

It may be a big deal... BoS has a totally different game engine, so we don't know yet how large amounts of ground units would affect the game.

[Foobar]

Absolutely!

It`s odd to look at airfields and no humans are there. Unfortunatley human models will raise the object count.

Looking great for screenshots(courtesy of Scoobe SIMHQ):

 

It's not the polycount wich brings a video card to its knees, its's the amount of textures.

[easyTarget]

I don't think this is that big of a deal. Warthunder has IMO the best looking low level graphics for ground attack that I have seen in a flight sim and they do this without people.

 

I really like how in WT you can see the dust rising from the tank columns way in the distance or from high above. It also runs at a very high fps with AAA and flak shooting at you so it's very immersive not to have any slowdown when you fire your weapons at low alt. DCS always loses 20fps for me when strafing. In IL2 and DCS it is always really hard for me to find the ground targets from afar.

I agree i hope the developers are aware of the trouble to spot ground stuff from far, and i think there is many little neat aids to make them visible, like dust,smoke,glittering and so on. hope not some huge icons covering the object when u try to line up shots

[FlatSpinMan]

I loved that shot of the ground crew in RoF.

Especially at bases human forms add soooo much to the feeling of being in a real place. I love the figures that SYN_Vander has developed for RoF.

It'd be such a waste if there were no humans in the game. They don't need to be everywhere, nor to be hyper-detailed, but they would add so much.

Even if we can't get soldiers, ground crew at the home airfield would be great. After all, we're all guaranteed to start there and somewhat less-guaranteed to end there.

 

"Please please please please please "

 

(And now the clincher)

 

"With cherries on top".

 

That should do it.

[Uufflakke]

It's not the polycount wich brings a video card to its knees, its's the amount of textures.

 

Something that occured once in a while in IL-2 indeed.

With a high density of different objects the fps drops considerably which  happens for instance when flying over some cities on the default Slovakia map. It did not lead to a crash to desktop.

But indeed the amount of textures causes a CTD. Happened already to many of us when flying over the full version of the modded Alpen maps by Zipzapp.

 

I don't know how it is with ROF and BoS because they are based on another engine.

The more textures the merrier. And 2048x2048 size instead of 1024x1024

[76IAP-Black]

Why not keep it the same as in il2? Just some running soldiers from ground vehicles, looked great in 2001 and still a nice feature in 2013 I would appriciate it.

[WklinkTomCofield]

Part of the issue as I see it is the theater and the battle that is being represented.  Lets face it, if this was a representation of the Western Air War over Germany in 1944 this probably wouldn't be a big deal.  High level bomber intercepts would negate any need for detailed ground forces.  But there is a significant part of the battle, where the Soviets were desperately trying to funnel troops across the Volga into Stalingrad while the Luftwaffe was bombing and strafing to stop them and then later the breakout where infantry and armor assaults on the flanks led to some desperate winter attacks.  It would be difficult to render and I certainly don't expect massed troop attacks but some kind of infantry involvement would be nice.

 

And no, it won't be a deal breaker, just something that would be nice.

[FlatSpinMan]

I agree about the relevance to the theatre, Wklink. I guess we can represent troop columns with trucks and presumably there'll be a few types of boats for the river crossing, but, as you said, it would be nice to have infantry.

Nice to see you over here btw.

[FuriousMeow]

The day everyone abandons 32bit operating systems is the day developers will be able to create a program without constraints.

[hiro]

yes 32 bit has constraints but its not crippling where a game of BOS / CLOD's caliber will not have infantry.

 

I think the devs are narrowing their focus. Look at IL-2 vanilla, it was limited, though it was a wonderful flight sim that broke alot of boundaries (and pc's) . Then look at IL-1946 and Team Daidalos's efforts 10 years later . . .

 

I wouldn't mind infantry or people are modeled in the game because they'll add them later. Just the devs do a great job so the series doesn't crash and burn like CLOD and another crew has to step in to reboot the genre . . .

 

It'll be something they'll add in, once they have a solid base to start from.

[JG13_opcode]

The day everyone abandons 32bit operating systems is the day developers will be able to create a program without constraints.

Patently false.

[FuriousMeow]

No it's not. 2GB limit, and there are current limits in place on numbers of objects due to that. They have to focus the efforts, and this being an air combat focused game first...

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/64-bit-vista-gaming,2250-4.html

 

"The 2 GB 32-bit limit of applications has been a huge point of pain in the game industry for many years now, so there's plenty of pent-up demand for moving beyond it."

 

"Once we get a point where developers and publishers do focus on making x64-native versions of games, there are some performance improvements that can be had with more registers, better SSE2 SIMD utilization, aggressive use of memory mapped I/O, and significantly larger assets."

Edited June 29, 2013 by FuriousMeow

[AndyJWest]

Moving to 64-bit software relaxes constraints - it doesn't eliminate them. 

Edited June 29, 2013 by AndyJWest

[FuriousMeow]

You're right. 64bit won't buy more development cycle time, or invest more monies, or bring in a larger team - but those aren't technological constraints and nothing 64bit coded applications could have influence on.

[JG13_opcode]

You're right. 64bit won't buy more development cycle time, or invest more monies, or bring in a larger team - but those aren't technological constraints and nothing 64bit coded applications could have influence on.

64-bit architectures have plenty of technological constraints. Stop speaking in hyperbole.

 

x64 doesn't solve network bottlenecks, or disk-IO bottlenecks. Those are constraints.

 

If your Core i7's QPI is running at the standard 2.4 GHz then it peaks at 19.4 GB/s which means your DDR4 can saturate that bandwidth all by itself, so there's a bottleneck even without accounting for the GPU. x64 won't help you there, either.

 

No constraints, huh?

Edited July 1, 2013 by JG13Doggles

[Fornixx]

First Il2-related post in 7 years :-) Well... Although its a flight simulator, in this particular theatre infantry is important due to the low level action. Il2 with all its good stuff always felt sterile low level. Almost like the action took place over an empty training area and not a living battlefield. Some sollution to infantry would be great and I'd happily sacrifice some of the hi textures for some ground action. Hope they come up with some kind of sollution 

[Sven]

Might be a bit complex to 'just' add infantry to the game. It would be silly to have them just stand in the field out in the open as a normal object. In order not to have silly infantry, they should be able to move and find cover. Aircraft weren't send out to take out infantry squads in ww2, that's a waste of the aircraft's potential. They were sent out to attack identifiable positions or strong-points, containing infantry of course. A more realistic way to add 'infantry' targets is to make these positions and strongholds into destroyable objectives, like a trench system, or dug-out line, with MG emplacements, and static infantry.

 

Would also like to see horse-drawn carriages in supply columns.   And hopefully we will see infantry running from trucks when they're being strafed.

[ACG_Kraut]

I don't think this is that big of a deal. Warthunder has IMO the best looking low level graphics for ground attack that I have seen in a flight sim and they do this without people.

 

WT actually does have infantry and also artillery gunners.

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

I think we need infantry and gunners in arty and aaa as soon as possible. Running soldiers from trucks is a classic thing should be included.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

I played IL2 since 2001 and I can honestly say I've never really noticed infantry.

[AX2]

I played IL2 since 2001 and I can honestly say I've never really noticed infantry.

 

 

__________________________________________________________________________

 

 Running soldiers from trucks is a classic   

 

JG62Gielow

 

+1

Edited July 15, 2013 by Mustang

[79_vRAF_Friendly_flyer]

I would very much like to see some infantry, and hopefully some airfield crew too. I would however like to see a workable game more. The developers priorities seem spot on to me.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Crew on guns/vehicals etc would be nice but infantry surely is pointless when there should realistically be hundreds of thousands of them on the ground.

[Sokol1]

I played IL2 since 2001 and I can honestly say I've never really noticed infantry.

 

"Lauf Forrest, lauf!"

 

http://www.combatsim.com/memb123/img/1/6/0/il2-troop2.jpg

http://www.combatsim.com/memb123/img/1/6/0/il2-troop4.jpg

http://www.combatsim.com/memb123/img/1/6/0/il2-troop5.jpg

 

From Combatsim.com 2001 il-2 Sturmovik review.

 

Sokol1

Edited July 16, 2013 by Sokol1

[6./ZG26_Emil]

"Lauf Forrest, lauf!"

 

http://www.combatsim.com/memb123/img/1/6/0/il2-troop2.jpg

http://www.combatsim.com/memb123/img/1/6/0/il2-troop4.jpg

http://www.combatsim.com/memb123/img/1/6/0/il2-troop5.jpg

 

From Combatsim.com 2001 il-2 Sturmovik review.

 

Sokol1

 

 

Not all of us fly around in circles on the deck you know

[trumps]

If ever there was a battlefield where visible infantry was needed this is it, With the eastern front campaigns the VVS was built around it's low level ground attack aircraft. the thought of bearing down on a train with troops running for shelter as in the promo video, or troops running behind and alongside advancing tanks really would be the icing on the cake for me!

 

Craig

[Mac_Messer]

I think we need infantry and gunners in arty and aaa as soon as possible. Running soldiers from trucks is a classic thing should be included.

+1

Perhaps people are forgetting that enabling human figures to appear was totally optional.

[Feathered_IV]

+2

Flight sims seem to be going backwards in many respects.  Greater advances in complexity make for less activity in the air and on the ground.

[dburne]

+2

Flight sims seem to be going backwards in many respects.  Greater advances in complexity make for less activity in the air and on the ground.

 

I would wholeheartedly agree with that!

 

I can remember many long hours of flying, with earlier sims like Janes Longbow, then Longbow 2, EECH, IL2, etc... Did not seem to take near as long to get acclimated and flying combat missions with them, so much more of my time was spent in the air having a blast.

 

Now I spend so much of my time trying to learn systems, how to employ combat measures, heck just how to start the aircraft...

 

ROF has been a nice surprise for me, while it certainly has a learning curve to it, it is not intense as some of these others I have been trying. Of course not a lot of complexity to those aircraft either...