Developer Diary, Part XXIII

[JG13_opcode]

I'm as concerned as everyone else about the projected 'progression' model that has been outlined, mainly due to the potential effects on online wars & squadron play - got to CAP location XYZ? Need drop tanks to get there & back with a reasonable time over the combat area, but Bill & George haven't progressed far enough in the single player campaign to get the drop tank - oops.

This is precisely my concern.

[FlatSpinMan]

Well, let's just wait and see, eh? I'm sure the issue will be clarified some time soon. Until then, there's little sense fretting about things beyond our control. The Devs must be aware of what people want to know and are concerned about by this point in the thread.

It's Saturday - kick back and relax.  

BTW - just had a look on a big screen at those ground object shots. Fantastic! Just wondering - are the shelters shown single objects or or collections of several objects placed together? If they are single objects, that's great - it'll really help to make bases look more lifelike quickly and simply. If gun emplacements, machine gun nests, camp objects were similar it'd be great. I thought the snow covered ground looked really good, too.

This is going to be most interesting.

[Bearcat]

Just because someone has a weapon mod fitted to their plane doesn't make them a better or more effective pilot. Just about all of these mods come with very significant penalties in FM performance. It's hardly pay-to-win. 

Think gunpods on a 109 in IL2..  Besides most of the weapons mods in RoF are things like rockets or wing mounted guns.. or balloon guns ..

[Jason_Williams]

Guys,

 

Let me make this as clear as possible. You cannot buy the unlockable content. Zak was referring to buying airplanes. More info regarding the content will be released in due time.

 

Jason

[Opitz]

The sound in the game is terrific. The best of all I've heard yet. I am fully confident that you guys will bring something special! 

[Uufflakke]

Just wondering - are the shelters shown single objects or or collections of several objects placed together? If they are single objects, that's great - it'll really help to make bases look more lifelike quickly and simply. If gun emplacements, machine gun nests, camp objects were similar it'd be great.

 

No, they are not single objects, the oil drums and crates.

The shelter + objects are one item. At least the ones in the screenshots.

Because the oil drum is also mapped to some parts of the shelter. Like I've shown on page 3.

 

 

Edited July 6, 2013 by Uufflakke

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Well, I do not mind using SP to get stuff. I am rusty in my flying and need some practice to get back to the saddle so to say. Getting extra stuff, OK, whatever. I will wait for more detailed information on the system before jumping on the bandwagon touting doom and P2W already. My main concerns are elsewhere than in achievements and rewards.

[StG2_Manfred]

I had the same thoughts..

 

 

I am in this group.. I guess the hardcore thing goes both ways. I have flown a handfull of single player campaigns.. mainlyh because of time issues. Very often I fly for an hour or so in the morning before I go to work.. or in the evening with my squadmates in coops mostly.. My sim time is limited and even though I would not be adverse to being able to buy these mods and upgrades it seems as if it would be a penalty on thiose who don't have the time to do campaigns.

 

It does make it sound like it.. but I still am pretty confident that the only thing BoS will have in common with WT is that both deal with WWII aircraft.

 

+1

 

 

I understand where you are coming from..

 

Some.. say some hardcore simmers.. and you would be correct. That hardcore thing goes in all directions. This was a part of the beauty of IL2 especially at this stage in it's life. It pretty much offers up something for just about any kind of simmer.. even if it is a little dated.

 

 

Like Kestrel said.. I have faith in the devs.. and these thinsg are just gbeing discussed here.. and nothing is etched in stone yet.. so I will wait for thew final product. I have been digging into RoF more of late and even though the WWI action iss till pretty much not my thing RoF as a sim is a great product and bodes extremely well for what we can expect from BoS. None of these updates diminish my entusiasm for BoS in any way.. Only the final product can do that.

++1 fully agree with you Bearcat

 

I would really like to know how people come to their conclusions about the numbers of multiplayer or singleplayer fans. I mean how do they count them?   Don't want to be impolite, I'm just wondering.

I can only speak for myself and my IL2-squadron, which meets weekly and at the good days we are up to 40-50 pilots flying for the german side, plus opponents. And we fly coordinated bomber strikes, escorted by fighters, so it's not only furball action. And as also already said from some fellows before, in my opinion AI can never give you the same immersion as a human pilot, cause they act always silly, unpredictable and unrealistic. That's the reason our squadron prefer human opponents, even it's quite harder then to win the battle (sometimes we get almost no bomber returning to our home base  )

 

Hopefully they can keep all the different kind of players in mind and the they don't run out of budget. At least they show sympathetic for all of us and that's really great (and professional).

[Uufflakke]

Quote from Dev Update XXIII:

 

Every regiment will have its specific camouflage - exactly the same they used to have in the war, but you'll be allowed to put on a different one when you earn it. Such individual skin won't be absolutely voluntary, you will not be able to draw Mickey Mouse and etc. but be sure that we'll pick the most original and eye-catching camo patterns of real pilot in the history of the Battle.

 

 

 

But Luftwaffe pilot Horst Carganico, who also served during Operation Barbarossa, did have a Mickey Mouse painted on his Bf-109.

 

 

 

And he was not the only pilot with a Mickey Mouse painted on his crate...

 

Adolf Galland was one of them.

 

 

 

And several others.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think it is fairly easy to explain why they painted a mouse on their plane.

Mouse --> Mauser.

[senseispcc]

If I understand correctly if you are no god at the game you get advancement !  If you want my advice it is not a good idea, do not forget not all people how play this games are hard core full time "flygthsim" fans and want to enjoy the game in the fast and furious way and maybe love to pay for the all complete game ?! 

From the sound of it this shall be a great game. :-)

[=69.GIAP=RADKO]

I must admit I was freaking out yesterday quite a bit but I really do have faith with the devs. I'm all for giving new players a chance. It does have a large learning curve and it'll be nice if the game kept newcomers interested long enough to realise that World of Planes and War Thunder is just child play compared to BoS. Giving them enough time to fully understand the amount of fun you can get out of a combat simulator is a good thing. It's probably one of the most important aspects of the business model and the IL2 community. We want new players to become fully fledged combat simmers and so do the devs.

 

Anything that will prolong interest in the game so long as it doesn't compromise in historical accuracy and doesn't cause online campaigning to be difficult is a good thing. We must't forget that newcomers to the combat simming world should always be a top priority from a community prospective. However I think any newcomer who's completed the singe player campaign and wants to show off their high rank, skins like it's a way to show how good you are will be in for a huge shock.

 

To become good against human opponents you have to be ready to eat dirt or drink water for a few months 

Edited July 6, 2013 by =69.GIAP=RADKO

[slm]

If I understand correctly if you are no god at the game you get advancement !  If you want my advice it is not a good idea, do not forget not all people how play this games are hard core full time "flygthsim" fans and want to enjoy the game in the fast and furious way and maybe love to pay for the all complete game ?! 

From the sound of it this shall be a great game. :-)

 

Yes, for many people the thing that prevents them from playing a game is how much time is required.

How long do you need to learn basic functionality, configure controllers etc.

If getting access to some virtual gear requires weeks of playing - well, it will be very interesting to see what players will think.

[ST_ami7b5]

So far, so good.

[Talisman]

My fear is that the new business model will split my on-line squad and the on-line community if we will not be able to fly together in the same aircraft to the same specification in the same squad.

 

I belong to a squad that flies together on CloD as we did on IL2 and flies with other squads and individuals on-line a lot. Our squad and other squads meet up at air shows, etc, and there is a real sense of community. We often take part in historical campaigns on-line and I would consider us to be part of a hard core bunch of players who contribute to the community as many other on-line squads and players do.

 

I am trying to trust the devs as I want to be flying on SoW with my squad soon, but am I correct to be worried that the new SoW business model will not allow us to fly together in the same aircraft specification unless we have all had the time to fly single player missions to upgrade our aircraft to the same specification?

 

Also, I suggest that recruiting new member to on-line squads may be more difficult if we do not have a level playing field for our squad aircraft specification.

 

When CloD was released and was such a failure it split my squad and others as some would not touch it. That hurt us a lot. I would not want to see our squad and others hurt again with SoW because of hurdles set up to make it difficult for us to fly as a team with the same equipment.

 

However, I would like to say that when I first flew IL2 I very much enjoyed the off-line single player campaigns and learnt a lot about the history of the Eastern front in the process. But then it was easy for me to go on-line after that and to join a squad and all fly the same aircraft specification. How easy will that be to do in SoW?

 

I am lucky as I would have the time and would love to play single player missions in SoW at the beginning. But this latest news causes me to worry about the on-line squad community and the future sustainable viability of squad activity on-line.

Edited July 6, 2013 by Talisman

[Bearcat]

SoW... You mean BoS right?

[theOden]

My fear is that the new business model will split my on-line squad and the on-line community if we will not be able to fly together in the same aircraft to the same specification in the same squad...

 

One way to do it is of course letting the mission maker use the planes available to all interersted at flying the upcoming mission.

It's not that Jason and LOFT forces any missionmaker to put in rare stuff needing 400 hours singleplayer, in all missions.

 

Also, how could CLOD be to blame that a part of your squad refuse to fly old IL2 with those of your friends that cannot get CLOD up and running? Maybe the squad isn't that tightly connected as impression was?

[Foobar]

No, they are not single objects, the oil drums and crates. (...)

 

Count the reactions on the last 2 pages. Face the truth: nobody cares with such details.

 

However, I'm with you.

[BlitzPig_EL]

Unlocks? 

 

Really?

 

In a serious combat flight sim?

 

Are you trying to destroy this genre?  Are you?

 

There were no unlocks in real life.

 

No new member to a squadron had to wait till a certain number of missions were completed to get

drop tanks, or whatever equipment was necessary to fulfill the missions his unit was tasked with.

 

Why is this idea even being entertained?

 

Please help me to understand this, because I don't, at all.

[Zak]

No new member to a squadron had to wait till a certain number of missions were completed to get

drop tanks, or whatever equipment was necessary to fulfill the missions his unit was tasked with.

The new member to a squadron getts planes that are fully capable of completing their mission, these are good aircraft of their era.

 

My fear is that the new business model will split my on-line squad and the on-line community if we will not be able to fly together in the same aircraft to the same specification in the same squad.

Fear not. You and your friends will be buying (I hope you will) the same game. So all of you will have same planes.

[philiped]

Unlocks? 

 

Really?

 

In a serious combat flight sim?

 

Are you trying to destroy this genre?  Are you?

 

There were no unlocks in real life.

 

No new member to a squadron had to wait till a certain number of missions were completed to get

drop tanks, or whatever equipment was necessary to fulfill the missions his unit was tasked with.

 

Why is this idea even being entertained?

 

Please help me to understand this, because I don't, at all.

 

I very much doubt that one will have to achieve a certain number of kills or similar achievements in order to unlock modifications necessary for the completion of the next mission. What I am ascertaining from this update is that the player can unlock modifications which come with both perks and drawbacks, the most simplistic case being that they will affect FM performance but may improve the gameplay experience in other areas. I don't think they are intended to be necessary for progress in the game. They are there for entertainment value whilst still serving a historical purpose.

 

I think it is a sound idea for the team to follow. If this game is a success it will draw in new customers, so people around here need to drop their parochial approach to this game and realise that whilst it is aimed at flight-sim enthusiasts, the gameplay has to be good too. And for it to be good it needs to attract people who may end up becoming sim-enthusiasts themselves. One of the main drawbacks in CloD for me is the lack of good accessible gameplay. The campaign is boring and messy and the overall experience is initially short-lived. It did not attract new customers at all.

 

If this game follows the route of the original Il-2 series it will undoubtedly entice new customers which is great. Consequently the dev team needs to balance the gameplay with the realistic scenario, and I think they seem to be doing a great job of it. 

 

Of course if your doubts are right and these modifications are necessary for the completion of the campaign then I think the dev team is making an awful mistake. I enjoy playing a campaign and watching my pilot earn tangible awards through experience, however these rewards should not hinge my campaign progress.

 

So long as the sim itself has the core structure to ensure campaign completion these mods should just be extra gimmicks, and if they are then I am not complaining.

Just my 2p.

[Heywooood]

ok so all the usual suspects are mashing the panic button again eh?  *yawn*

 

BtW - how many negative, fraidy-cat, namby pamby sky is falling posts does one have to make to unlock the panic button mod???

 

I say the devs should award the big RED button in the form of an icon or avatar to the frequent cryers applied to all their postings until such time as they come to their senses...or drown in their tears

 

I'm sure I'll be warned over this but c'mon - qwitcher bitchin already and let the f'n thing take shape...no one knows how its going to play out, these are ideas and plans which anyone who's ever made either knows are always 'subject to change'

 

seriously - its only a flesh wound...stop bloody screaming all the time

[79_vRAF_Friendly_flyer]

There were no unlocks in real life.

 

No new member to a squadron had to wait till a certain number of missions were completed to get

drop tanks, or whatever equipment was necessary to fulfill the missions his unit was tasked with.

 

While I'm not too entertained by the idea, "unlocks" certainly existed, they were just named otherwise: Upgrades, new equipment, new toys etc. The "Tilly orifice" and metal rudders for the Spitfire springs to mind. Squadrons deemed most most in need received them first.

 

In a campaign, it should be possible to introduce them in a manner than make the story flow well. It could be introduced during the mission brief like:

 

"The Brass is so pleased with our work in the {Insert name of small, smoking pile village here}, they want us to hit it again. They have sent us the new {insert name of suicidally heavy gunpod} to make sure we can take out the enemy panzer. The eggheads advice us to come it at a shallow angle etc..."

 

The benefit is that next mission, you can opt to have gunpods laying around since Operation Smoking pile-village if you expect to come up against panzers and not meet enemy fighters.

 

Or at least that's how I read the devs.

[BlitzPig_EL]

Friendly_flyer,

 

My interpretation is that the devs are implementing a very "gamey" solution that has no place in a flight simulation.

 

Your example of the Tilly Orifice, and the metal control surfaces is apt.   They were not "awarded" to pilots for any reason at all, they were installed or retrofitted to all aircraft as soon

as practicable.  These were not perks for completing missions. 

 

I just see this as very unhistorical, because frankly, it is.

 

Can power ups be far behind?

 

 

[Uufflakke]

Count the reactions on the last 2 pages. Face the truth: nobody cares with such details.

 

However, I'm with you.

 

It is just something I noticed these tiny flaws.

But that is what happens after having repainted about 100,150 objects for the IL-2 modding community.

To be honest there has hardly been any response to the shown screenshots and video on page 1.

We are all more interested/concerned about the BoS business model at the moment.

In this Dev's Update the images doesn't match with the content of text.

Objects look great though.

[csThor]

I'm not sure how to view this decision. On the one hand it's a laudable idea to offer something besides the usual medals in offline gameplay but it remains to be seen what exactly is offered and how it is implemented. I'm adopting a wait-and-see attitude this far, but I can also understand the skepticism of others who are more interested in multiplayer.

[DD_Arthur]

ok so all the usual suspects are mashing the panic button again eh?  *yawn*

 

 

 

I don't think thats very fair Heywooood. I don't think this forum has been around long enough for "the usual suspects" to evolve yet.  I do see a lot of guys - just like you yourself - who have a lot of experience of IL2 and RoF who share genuine concerns and are voicing them.  Isn't that part of the function of these forums?

 We also know the time is fast approaching when features are finalised.  So now is the time for concerns to be voiced, albeit in a constructive manner.

 

I have seen the Dev team say unlocks are a popular part of other games and when this project was announced I also read the Producer's remarks about getting back to original IL2.   IL2 isn't "other games" thats why it's endured this long and it's also why someone is willing to keep investing in IL2 after the financial disaster that was CLoD.

 

Technically, from the little we've seen so far it's obvious that it's going to be good.  I don't believe it needs gimmicks.      

Edited July 6, 2013 by arthursmedley

[71st_AH_Hooves]

Friendly_flyer,

 

My interpretation is that the devs are implementing a very "gamey" solution that has no place in a flight simulation.

 

Your example of the Tilly Orifice, and the metal control surfaces is apt.   They were not "awarded" to pilots for any reason at all, they were installed or retrofitted to all aircraft as soon

as practicable.  These were not perks for completing missions. 

 

I just see this as very unhistorical, because frankly, it is.

 

Can power ups be far behind?

 

This is just ridiculous. No power ups wll not be coming, quit your melodrama. And yes there are examples of better plots getting better equipment as eluded to earlier in this thread. But you all need to relax these upgrades aren't going to provide you a mig15. They are tiny and I'm sure that a stock plane will be able to do just fine against a plane with a small upgrade.

[Bearcat]

I'm not sure how to view this decision. On the one hand it's a laudable idea to offer something besides the usual medals in offline gameplay but it remains to be seen what exactly is offered and how it is implemented. I'm adopting a wait-and-see attitude this far, but I can also understand the skepticism of others who are more interested in multiplayer.

 

One of the most sensible posts in this thread.. We all need to just wait and see what's coming before we start talking about what we are going to get because we really do not know....... I will place my faith in this matter with the devs rather than any uninformed or partially informed (which is what we all have at best) speculation... A wise man I know once told me.. 90% of the things we worry about do not happen and the 10% that do we overcome..

[III/JG53Frankyboy]

my concern is realy about that, as it looks in the moment, a player is 'forced' to fly singleplayer campaigns ( for each aircraft itself i guess) to be able to use these items ( canonpods , droptanks, bombs, reargunners, rockets etc - depends on aircraft) in multiplayer.

Perhaps this fact the team should overthink IMHO !

[Feuerfalke]

Friendly_flyer,

 

My interpretation is that the devs are implementing a very "gamey" solution that has no place in a flight simulation.

 

Your example of the Tilly Orifice, and the metal control surfaces is apt.   They were not "awarded" to pilots for any reason at all, they were installed or retrofitted to all aircraft as soon

as practicable.  These were not perks for completing missions. 

 

I just see this as very unhistorical, because frankly, it is.

 

Can power ups be far behind?

 

Not quite.

 

In WW1 and WW2 new weapons and upgrades were always implemented in those squadrons, that could most effectively use them or where it was appropriate. They didn't simply wait till they had enough Fokker Dr1 and then retrofitted all squadrons at the same time. Only the most successfull squadrons got them for combat evaluation. One of the first pilots to fly them into combat was Richthofen. This was definitely not a random choice and this is just a single (famous) example.

 

I'd prefer to have it the way that you can unlock this stuff on ranked servers, where it really counts. And on unranked, you should be allowed to use all modifications. This would allow for Squadron-Fights and it would also offer a testbed for players and devs when implementing new modifications and planes.

Edited July 6, 2013 by Feuerfalke

[Talisman]

SoW... You mean BoS right?

Yes, BoS.  Sorry about that.

[Caudron431]

Wow this update is fantastic: sounds and graphics are awesome!

 

 They are tiny and I'm sure that a stock plane will be able to do just fine against a plane with a small upgrade.

Most certainly. And i'm sure most of the offliners will appreciate something like this, it is really nice from the 1CGS team to think about them BTW. I for one find the idea interesting.

 

Anyway big thanks to the devs: you are doing great

[Talisman]

One way to do it is of course letting the mission maker use the planes available to all interersted at flying the upcoming mission.

It's not that Jason and LOFT forces any missionmaker to put in rare stuff needing 400 hours singleplayer, in all missions.

 

Also, how could CLOD be to blame that a part of your squad refuse to fly old IL2 with those of your friends that cannot get CLOD up and running? Maybe the squad isn't that tightly connected as impression was?

If the new product does not live up to customer needs or expectation then there is a split between those that are willing to put up with it and those that are not.  CloD was seen as a failure but some wanted to stick with it even so.  If the BoS business model is seen to fail on-line squad play then there could be a split in the community squads again as people stick with earlier products or move on to new ones; simple as that.  I did not mention the word blame.  I simply stated the facts of what happened when a product was released that was viewed by customers as failing to meet needs or expectations.  I would like to see BoS be so good that it is more likely to bring people along together in a large and stable community. 

[Bearcat]

I might be wrong here but I think the only thing that will make BoS fail on-line squad play will be if the online squad play is bad..

 

I don't think you (not a personal specific YOU but a general you) can compare the development/release process of BoS with CoD because they are already on two entirely different paths and we need to stop doing that collectively as well as individually, or at least put it in perspective if that comparison is made. If my memory serves me correctly less than 12 months into CoD it was nowhere even close to being as developed as BoS is.. and we have already seen more communication for BoS from it's creative team than we did in the first 2-3 years of CoD.. Don't forget.. if I am not mistaken SoW/BoB/CoD began or at least was announced on '05.. maybe '06 at the latest.   CoD was seen as a failure at release because it was. If you produce a product that less than 25% of the people who have been waiting over 5 years for it's release can even use .. then it qualifies as a failure.. so we move on.

 

That was then.. that was them .. this is now and I think that BoS will be a different horse. Granted I have no doubt that there will be much weeping and gnashing of teeth by some folks.. because you just can't please everyone.. but I am willing to bet money that many of the 4000+ folks who have signed onto these boards and who hopefully will support the sim upon it's release will be pleased with the product and it will be a worthy product. We all may have some concerns about what we hear but I think we need to be mindful that no matter what it may sound like we need to wait till we get the product.. at least get scuttlebutt on the beta before we jump to any real solid conclusions..

 

 

 

I would like to see BoS be so good that it is more likely to bring people along together in a large and stable community.

 

Absolutely..

[JG13_opcode]

I might be wrong here but I think the only thing that will make BoS fail on-line squad play will be if the online squad play is bad..

If squads can't all take drop tanks because certain members haven't "unlocked" their drop tank options, then they can't run the same mission as the rest of their squad mates. That will make online squad play bad.

 

I'm not sure why people are having trouble understanding this.

 

Preventing people from getting equipment until they play a bunch of awful singleplayer missions is a terrible idea, full-stop.

Edited July 6, 2013 by JG13Doggles

[BraveSirRobin]

Having to fly in a SP campaign in order to unlock features that you want to use in MP is a really terrible idea.  I have no interest in playing a SP campaign.

[DD_fruitbat]

If squads can't easily host themselves without monstrous internet connections (as in RoF), no server admin controls, can't easily create missions in the mission builder and co-ops at that, and if they have to play offline to be able to fly the same stuff due to unlocks, it will not be 'squad friendly' game and it will end up being predominately dogfight server orientated game as is Rof and Clod is with a few groups controlling the online environment, and it just being endless boring (imo) dogfights. 

 

These reasons above, are the main reason that the squad i fly in, that Il2 is still by far our main activity, as we can control what we do and fly how we want, and i know i am not alone in this opinion from talking to other squads that we have contact with through the SEOW environment, online wars being the environment that i personally want to be flying in.

Edited July 6, 2013 by fruitbat

[ATAG_Slipstream]

In over ten years, and several thousand hours of flying il2, I have probably spent under an hour flying offline, and that was in the quick mission builder.I am an online only player, and have zero interest in flying an offline campaign just to unlock features I want to use online.

Terrible idea, and I hope the devs rethink it before it is too late.

[Peshka]

I say this is good news

The deveelpors want to make a good time for the main customers who spend there money.

Internet flight sim game players are a small number with loud voice that shout very loud ... and shout loud ... and loud ... and ... again they shout !!

Most of the players do not

 

[Caudron431]

I say this is good news

 

The deveelpors want to make a good time for the main customers who spend there money.

 

Internet flight sim game players are a small number with loud voice that shout very loud ... and shout loud ... and loud ... and ... again they shout !!

 

Most of the players do not

I too feel like it is good news for offliners, and i really hope that the single player campaigns will have interesting features as the one mentionned.

However, since the sim is still in development and since there is still a lot of time to implement things onliners should not dramatize that much about online gaming, with a dev team like this one i'm sure both parts will be happy in the end.