Jump to content

Possibilities of a late war eastern front module


Eisenfaustus
 Share

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:


Yeah, I’m sure it was a totally random decision to go with late war super planes to try to save the franchise.

 

Yak-3 and Yak-9U count as late war super planes.

 

The Yak-3 is the best low-level dogfighter in WWII. That's not really a matter of opinion; it's light, fast, good acceleration and climb, and has a strong nose-mounted armament. By any definition, that's the list of ingredients you need for a great fighter.

 

9U has the potential of going ~420 MPH while mounting various combinations of heavy cannons (23mm-37mm).

 

That's pretty damn super.

 

So the whole argument of the Eastern Front being a death knell for the franchise--whatever truth that might've had before, doesn't apply here. There's plenty of high performance planes on offer for both Germany and Russia.

 

The only problem is the dullness of the map. That's it.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

 

Yak-3 and Yak-9U count as late war super planes.

 

The Yak-3 is the best low-level dogfighter in WWII. That's not really a matter of opinion; it's light, fast, good acceleration and climb, and has a strong nose-mounted armament. By any definition, that's the list of ingredients you need for a great fighter.

 

9U has the potential of going ~420 MPH while mounting various combinations of heavy cannons (23mm-37mm).

 

That's pretty damn super.

 

So the whole argument of the Eastern Front being a death knell for the franchise--whatever truth that might've had before, doesn't apply here. There's plenty of high performance planes on offer for both Germany and Russia.

 

The only problem is the dullness of the map. That's it.


You responded to the wrong person.  I think late war VVS will sell.  It’s the early war stuff that is the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Noisemaker said:

I've been to Hungary, it's not as interesting a landscape as Italy.

Italy also offers us a wide variety of new and interesting aircraft...

Don't forget the new cloud effects!

Vesuvius 1944!

 

If we never get the Pacific, then I'm 1147% in favor of the Mediterranean happening; 2 different DLCs to cover everything, maybe.

 

But after the Eastern Front is wrapped up. I really don't get the opposition to it. To act like that whole theater around Berlin just didn't happen, because the map's boring or because some people have a certain disdain for Russian planes... I don't understand it at all.

 

15 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

It’s the early war stuff that is the problem.

 

It is boring at face value, and there is a lot of plane repetition with minor performance differences--but, that said, it does in retrospect make a good foundation for the sim.

 

All that aside, I agree that the further back in time they go from '43, the more likely the sales will suffer.

Edited by oc2209
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

but, that said, it does in retrospect make a good foundation for the sim.

 


Crappy one sided plane sets don’t generate revenue.  And they need revenue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, [F.Circus]FrangibleCover said:

Vistula-Oder is far, far too big for a module. You need to have sufficient depth in your map to have airbases miles behind the start line of an offensive for the attackers at the start and to have airbases miles behind the end line of an offensive for the defenders at the end. V-O was so insanely quick that if you start the map at Warsaw and make it the largest one that Il-2 has had yet, you'll still run off the far end in about ten days. Better to do the last few days of V-O (apparently something of a Happy Time for the remainder of the Luftwaffe because the RKKA had outrun the VVS and had very limited air cover), the stop on the Oder, a bit of the battle for Stettin perhaps and then the final offensive, the fall of Berlin and the surrender of Nazi Germany. That's about two months, but it's iconic and you get every aircraft going.

 

That´s why I wrote part of poland because they also need part of germany for the airfields. Timeframe could be 02/45-5/45. A map this size would work perfectly, includes czechoslovakia where a lot of luftwaffe units spent their last weeks and would be about the size of Rhineland.

 

image.thumb.png.92341463762be5b34e5dedcb44313dc2.png

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

 

The only problem is the dullness of the map. That's it.

 

While I don't think it's the only problem as I've stated before, I've thought more than once about how dull this map would be and yes...huge issue IMHO.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gambit21 said:

 

While I don't think it's the only problem as I've stated before, I've thought more than once about how dull this map would be and yes...huge issue IMHO.

 

 

Nevertheless, this is a combat flight simulator foremost. Not an exciting landscape simulator.

 

The planes are the stars of the show, as I see it. If the terrain we fly over is sometimes/often dull, that's life, can't win 'em all, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

 

Nevertheless, this is a combat flight simulator foremost. Not an exciting landscape simulator.

 

The planes are the stars of the show, as I see it. If the terrain we fly over is sometimes/often dull, that's life, can't win 'em all, etc.

 

With regard to the bolded...sure...as long as that doesn't mean the entire map.

 

 

If so then that's like saying if the racetrack scenery sucks in a racing sim, "well it's a racing sim after all, not an exciting scenery simulator" ;)

 

The fact of the matter is that we fly over the land, at very close proximity no less, and like clouds that land scenery is no less a part of the environment we fly through/over.

 

Now a strategic where we're at 20K all day, sure, who cares about the land etc.

Zipping along at medium and low altitudes like we do however - the map is as critical as anything else.

A rectangular chunk of green with no bodies of water to add interest and other play types/mission types etc wouldn't be the best idea IMO.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

A rectangular chunk of green with no bodies of water to add interest and other play types/mission types etc wouldn't be the best idea IMO.

 

If the climactic air battles of WWIII occur over Minnesota (no offense to midwesterners--I'm from there), and future sim developers are stuck recreating Minnesotan landscapes to fly over, then future sim players are just going to be sh** out of luck.

 

Let's be honest. Most of the world's terrain is pretty boring. The cold laws of probability and circumstance decreed that Germany's end occurred over a not-very-exciting-for-combat-simulations part of the world. 

 

As I said, we can't win 'em all. We can either develop a zen-like indifference to the vagaries of history, or we can complain and demand the devs move the next DLC to an Instagrammable celebrity vacation hotspot.

 

Collage_Cabo_San_Lucas.jpg

 

Oh yeah. I'm so flying a P-47M through that dramatic rock arch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

 

If the climactic air battles of WWIII occur over Minnesota (no offense to midwesterners--I'm from there), and future sim developers are stuck recreating Minnesotan landscapes to fly over, then future sim players are just going to be sh** out of luck.

 

I would tend to agree.

Fortunately we have options for epic battles with better landscapes. :P

 

 

6 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

 

Oh yeah. I'm so flying a P-47M through that dramatic rock arch.

 

Needs to be part of an air race course. :dance:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

 

Fortunately we have options for epic battles with better landscapes. :P

 


Not for the people who want to fly iconic late war VVS aircraft.  Which probably includes all of the staff in the development team and everyone in the Russian language section of the forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:


Not for the people who want to fly iconic late war VVS aircraft.  Which probably includes all of the staff in the development team and everyone in the Russian language section of the forum.

 

Indeed, but that’s a given.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Courland 1944-45. It was one of the best maps in the original IL2, features all the late war German and Soviet planes people would want, has plenty of coastline, and it doesn't have any huge, performance-crippling cities. Oh, and the campaign went all the way to the war's end. Bam, done. 😉

  • Like 3
  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[F.Circus]FrangibleCover
4 hours ago, LukeFF said:

Courland 1944-45. It was one of the best maps in the original IL2, features all the late war German and Soviet planes people would want, has plenty of coastline, and it doesn't have any huge, performance-crippling cities. Oh, and the campaign went all the way to the war's end. Bam, done. 😉

Was Courland actually a Great (Air) Battle though? I couldn't find much on it but my impression was that German air operations were somewhat desultory and the Soviets refused to overinvest in a sideshow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, [F.Circus]FrangibleCover said:

Was Courland actually a Great (Air) Battle though? I couldn't find much on it but my impression was that German air operations were somewhat desultory and the Soviets refused to overinvest in a sideshow.

 

Nope, a side show compared to what happened at the Oder between 01/45-04/45. 

 

Here the german OOBs as per Andrew Arthy (Operations in Kurland [Archive] - Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum (12oclockhigh.net)

 

1 November 1944
II./J.G. 54 at Libau-Grobin

8 November 1944
1./N.A.Gr. 5 at Frauenburg

15 November 1944
N.S.Gr. 3 at Libau-North

18 November 1944
1./N.A.Gr. 5 at Libau

24 November 1944
I./J.G. 54 at Libau & Windau
II./J.G. 54 at Libau
III./S.G. 3 at Cirava & Frauenburg
1./N.S.Gr. 3 at Libau-North
Stab N.A.Gr. 5 at Frauenburg & Libau
1./N.A.Gr. 5 at Frauenburg & Libau
2./N.A.Gr. 5 at Talsen
I./T.G. 1 at Windau
Fl.Verbindungsgeschwader 2 at Goldingen, Libau & Malkrogs

29 November 1944
2./F.A.Gr. 126 at Libau

12 December 1944
Stab J.G. 54 at Libau-Grobin
I./J.G. 54 at Cirava
II./J.G. 54 at Libau-Grobin
7./J.G. 54 at Libau-North
III./S.G. 3 at Cirava & Windau
Stab N.S.Gr. 3 at Libau-Grobin
1./N.S.Gr. 3 at Frauenburg
Stab N.A.Gr. 5 at Frauenburg & Libau-North
1./N.A.Gr. 5 at Frauenburg & Libau-North
2./N.A.Gr. 5 at Okte

14 December 1944
II./J.G. 54 at Libau-North

21 December 1944
II./J.G. 54 at Libau-Grobin

17 January 1945
III./S.G. 3 at Zabeln

5 February 1945
II./J.G. 54 at Cirava

15 February 1945
III./S.G. 3 at Zabeln

25 March 1945
II./J.G. 54 at Cirava

Sources
Pilot Logbooks
NA AIR 40/1965 - 1988

 

Christmas in Courland 1944 - Air War Publications

 

image.png.956541edafa87c4b8f616390a6986ad8.png

image.png.4b07f1d8a8da5321ac5624df6dffa5cd.pngimage.png.efe72fca0a9371cdeef811486006347b.png

 

Edited by sevenless
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, [F.Circus]FrangibleCover said:

Was Courland actually a Great (Air) Battle though? I couldn't find much on it but my impression was that German air operations were somewhat desultory and the Soviets refused to overinvest in a sideshow.

 

At so late stages of the war the "greatness" of air battles is debatable anyway, as allies had 10:1 or bigger superiority in numbers in pretty much any sector, so in that sense I personally would prefer earlier war scenarios, for example Italy would be nice. Other than that, for a late war scenario Courland could actually be quite good, as the map is probably quite well doable, like Luke said, and the same map could cover operations from October 1944 until the very end of the war in Europe. I would also say that the Soviets kind of overinvested a lot to that sideshow, with the last big offensive with big casualties still going on in April 1944, which was quite unnecessary for the outcome of war. Courland would probably not be a popular choice for it's own Great Battles title, though, for it's relative unknowness to wider audience and the lack of the late war über-planes ... or any new planes for Axis really. Courland map would be nice, though. Just like Karelia or Gulf of Finland map would be nice - I wonder what is the state of that project that was announced by the Finnish group some years ago...

 

For the next European based Great Battles title I think that Italy would be best choice. It is kind of famous (in the West) and could include interesting mid-war western planes and Italian planes for axis, as we have quite a lot of Bf-109's and Fw-190's already. Do-217 as a bomber would also be interesting to have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, oc2209 said:

 

Nevertheless, this is a combat flight simulator foremost. Not an exciting landscape simulator.

 

The planes are the stars of the show, as I see it. If the terrain we fly over is sometimes/often dull, that's life, can't win 'em all, etc.

 

I would disagree. I think the Moskow map is very dull and i avoid playing it at all costs. 

 

An interesting map makes a huge difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Robli said:

For the next European based Great Battles title I think that Italy would be best choice. It is kind of famous (in the West) and could include interesting mid-war western planes and Italian planes for axis, as we have quite a lot of Bf-109's and Fw-190's already. Do-217 as a bomber would also be interesting to have.

 

I was initially not very enthusiastic about Italy as I was under the impression from veteran interviews and the film Thunderbolt! (1945) that the Luftwaffe had virtually disappeared from the country after Rome was captured. But after looking at what assets the Luftwaffe and ANR still had there in early 1945 I'm much more on board

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From how it looks to me chances are high for next dlc to be late east front, also i remenber when there was talks on russian forum about whats after BoBp and how they wont more east front  Han posted that he suggested late war poland,
https://forum.il2sturmovik.ru/topic/12273-227-я-часть-дневников-разработчика/page/2/?tab=comments#comment-711212 
and few months later BoN was anounced, so his bid lost that time.

So to me Poland 45 is next this time.

 

Airplanes set is easy to do compared to what they have now to work for BoN. Map can easy be betwen Berlin-Warsaw, just have thouse citys off map like on moscow map for moscow, 1945 front fit map, and sizes of maps we have now in game, air battles are more fit for game engine then anything els, no need for big bombers players ask for and are glaringly missing for any west front, map would be easy to make compared to bon map, and after demanding BoN why not go for mutch easyer option, then something in italy that would be more demanding then bon.

Only thing easyer would be some channal 1942 scenario if they belive east front would not be popular as another west front. Also TF6 should cover 1942 west front if they still go by timeline on how they pick next expantions.

Pto is pipe dream at this point.

 

So ww2 you dont have mutch options with 5v5 model and reasanoble map sizes with historic targets and bases for take off/landings for SP campaign for it.

14 minutes ago, l_commando said:

 

I was initially not very enthusiastic about Italy as I was under the impression from veteran interviews and the film Thunderbolt! (1945) that the Luftwaffe had virtually disappeared from the country after Rome was captured. But after looking at what assets the Luftwaffe and ANR still had there in early 1945 I'm much more on board

Late war Italy 45 would have good map to play over but most airplanes that were there we already have in game, we have late war spit 9 p51 p47 p38 g14 k4 262 234 and so on... it would be hard to fined 10 airplanes that fit and were used.

Edited by CountZero
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to Wikipedia a veteran of the 4th guard fighter regiment claims his unit fully operated the P-63. And several German pilots claim to have fought Kingcobras. While the letter easily might be misidentified p-39 I see no incentive for the soviet vet to lie. And since the plane was available to the soviets I find the notion of them disregarding capitalist demands and using available assets as they saw fit quite believable. 
While no proof of its use against the Germans the opposite obviously can‘t be proven either. Thusly - given how cool an airplane this is - I think it’s inclusion as collector plane would roughly be as justified as the ta 152 h1.  And if the P-63 was used then in the area of Berlin just like the ta 152 as well. 
 

So maybe the P-63 would after all be good alternative for the yak 9U as soviet collector?

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’d vote P-39Q as the third Russian fighter to go with the Yak-3 and La-7.  And G-14/AS to go with the A-9 and G-10 - all 3 played a fairly big role in Bodenplatte as well so they cross fill nicely.

 

I’d also lean towards a Berlin/Oder map … if you made it the size of Rhineland, it would stretch from Berlin in the north to Prague in the south.  Most of the Luftwaffe units involved in BoBp were shifted east to this region in mid January 1945, so this gives some good potential for continuity.  Also there were US attacks into eastern Germany and Czechoslovakia during this period (including a couple cases of accidental VVS vs USAAF skirmishes) so you could mix that into some missions for some interesting variety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I'm sure I'll be happy with whatever the next module ends up being, out of all the later war Eastern Front actions to choose from, the one I would most like to see is Romania 1944 centered around Ploesti or Bucharest and the Jassy-Kishinev Offensives.

The potential for additional Romanian (as we already have the IAR 80 coming) and Italian aircraft is there for the Axis who would naturally also get the Bf-109 G10 as the missing link in the 109 lineage, and while it would be too early for the La-7 to make an appearance (cough premium cough) it would be good for the Yak-3 and the arrow wing IL-2s.

But in a bit of a twist for the theater, the Western Allies would also have a presence in the area with their raids on Bucharest and the Ploesti Oil Fields- thereby giving the American pilots something to do (Since I have been told that is a consideration we have to make apparently).
Plus, while I'm not sure how this would be accomplished in the campaign exactly, Romania switching sides after King Michael's Coup would present an interesting scenario for Luftwaffe/Romanian Careers with the potential for Axis vs Axis aircraft.

Also, while this isn't really that important, this module would pretty seamlessly continue the direct lineage of the Eastern Front Careers from Moscow through Kuban without a major time skip.  It would also leave room open for another late-late war Eastern front module such as Berlin/Austria/Courland 1945 should such a thing be desired.

A little unusual but its what I'd like to see.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[F.Circus]FrangibleCover
5 hours ago, Jade_Monkey said:

 

I would disagree. I think the Moskow map is very dull and i avoid playing it at all costs. 

 

An interesting map makes a huge difference.

Why is Moscow boring but Stalingrad and Rhineland alright? All three are made up mostly of relatively-flat grassland interspersed with towns, cities and lakes.

 

Honestly, to deal with both the complaints of the map being 'boring' and the issue of basing, I think we could have Berlin fully on the map. It's a large city but not a dense one, and if it's lakes you want there are few cities better. Run the map from the German airfield complex at Neustadt-Glewe (where the Ta 152s are) to Poznan and up to the coast at Rostock where Heinkel built the He 162. Both of the interesting German aircraft get a base, people who declare maps to be boring have to think of a new reason to dismiss Brandenburg.

 

3 hours ago, CountZero said:

So ww2 you dont have mutch options with 5v5 model and reasanoble map sizes with historic targets and bases for take off/landings for SP campaign for it.

Late war Italy 45 would have good map to play over but most airplanes that were there we already have in game, we have late war spit 9 p51 p47 p38 g14 k4 262 234 and so on... it would be hard to fined 10 airplanes that fit and were used.

For Italy 1945 there are Allied options, YP-80 being the big meme pick and A-26 being the selling point. Other than that, P-40N, late versions of the P-47 and P-38 with HVAR, I believe P-39Q, plenty of assorted medium bombers, Spitfire VIIIc (always said to be the most fun to fly of any model). Problem is, again, that you need to find five German aircraft. The ANR was completely requipped to Bf 109s by 1945.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Jade_Monkey said:

 

I would disagree. I think the Moskow map is very dull and i avoid playing it at all costs. 

 

An interesting map makes a huge difference.

 

 Are you arguing that most of the Eastern Front should have been ignored on the basis of dull geography?

 

That's ultimately what it boils down to. You can say all you want that it's boring, but in the interests of making a (reasonably) full WWII flight experience, the Eastern Front is 100% necessary. 

 

Are we children, or are we adults? That's a serious and legitimate question. An adult would understand that to accurately depict certain parts of the war, dull locations must be visited. Period. End of story. Resenting it won't change it; pretending large parts of the war didn't happen so you can fly in more exciting locales won't change it.

 

Personally, because I care much more about the airplanes and how they fly and how they fight, I couldn't care less about the ground I'm flying over. The only things that matter are the difficulties inherent to navigation in a featureless landscape. Which in itself is a realistic consideration and one that adds to the depth of the simulation. Just as real pilots learned in flat terrain, you must navigate by either rivers or roads and rail lines.

 

4 hours ago, Eisenfaustus said:

According to Wikipedia a veteran of the 4th guard fighter regiment claims his unit fully operated the P-63. And several German pilots claim to have fought Kingcobras. While the letter easily might be misidentified p-39 I see no incentive for the soviet vet to lie. And since the plane was available to the soviets I find the notion of them disregarding capitalist demands and using available assets as they saw fit quite believable. 
While no proof of its use against the Germans the opposite obviously can‘t be proven either. Thusly - given how cool an airplane this is - I think it’s inclusion as collector plane would roughly be as justified as the ta 152 h1.  And if the P-63 was used then in the area of Berlin just like the ta 152 as well. 
 

So maybe the P-63 would after all be good alternative for the yak 9U as soviet collector?

 

First of all, you won't get far here by using Wikipedia alone as a source for something as contentious as whether P-63s were used or not. You'll need something else to convince any devs.

 

I do agree with your assessment: why would Russia care/be afraid of petty Western regulations, especially at that stage in the war when it was essentially over? I find the P-63 stipulation illogical anyway; I mean why it was ever demanded to be used only against the Japanese in the first place.

 

Nevertheless, without 'official' documentation on where the P-63 operated from, with service start dates, probable loadouts, airfield locations, etc, I doubt the devs would be interested in using it. It would essentially force them to fudge the details of historical accuracy, which is something they seem to avoid as best they can.

 

I'm sure that last sentence will get some eye-rolls, but I'm not talking about engine timers and the like. I'm saying the devs seem to avoid totally making things up to fill in blanks where there's missing information. And that's pretty much where the P-63 would fall.

 

It's true that the Ta-152 and He-162 have laughably short and uneventful service records; but if there's reliable information on where they operated from (on paper, anyway, if not in practice for fuel shortages and the like) and in what configurations they theoretically operated with, then that's at least a bare minimum of data.

 

3 hours ago, VBF-12_KW said:

I’d vote P-39Q as the third Russian fighter to go with the Yak-3 and La-7.  And G-14/AS to go with the A-9 and G-10 - all 3 played a fairly big role in Bodenplatte as well so they cross fill nicely.

 

A P-39Q would be inferior in most respects to a Yak-9U. Especially in a 1945 scenario. I don't see the point. Only the P-63 would be a viable replacement for the 9U in terms of capability.

 

I also think two 109s in the same DLC would be marketing suicide. I don't care if it's been done before--between Eastern Front fatigue and 109/190 redundancy fatigue, it would be a poor choice right now.

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Eisenfaustus said:

According to Wikipedia a veteran of the 4th guard fighter regiment

 

Given that there was no 4th GIAP (which was btw a VVS VMF, a navy, unit) equipped with P-39 or later with P-63 at all, the credibility of Wikipedia is basically really low.

 

The myth of the P-63 being used in the Eastern Front should be put down once and for all

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, oc2209 said:

 Are you arguing that most of the Eastern Front should have been ignored on the basis of dull geography?

 

That's ultimately what it boils down to. You can say all you want that it's boring, but in the interests of making a (reasonably) full WWII flight experience, the Eastern Front is 100% necessary. 

 

Are we children, or are we adults? That's a serious and legitimate question. An adult would understand that to accurately depict certain parts of the war, dull locations must be visited. Period. End of story. Resenting it won't change it; pretending large parts of the war didn't happen so you can fly in more exciting locales won't change it.

Personally, because I care much more about the airplanes and how they fly and how they fight, I couldn't care less about the ground I'm flying over. The only things that matter are the difficulties inherent to navigation in a featureless landscape. Which in itself is a realistic consideration and one that adds to the depth of the simulation. Just as real pilots learned in flat terrain, you must navigate by either rivers or roads and rail lines.

 

 

No need to be a condescending twat. Just because someone has different preferences and enjoys different aspects of the sim than you do doesn't mean you can call them a child. Maybe you have some growing up to do yoursef.

 

Edited by Jade_Monkey
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, jeanba said:

Maps are very important to me and actually, especially on the Eastern front, I would be more interested to pay for more maps than more planes

I agree, they could do different map packs that fill in the gaps of the Russian Northern, Central and Southern Fronts so when playing a career you'd move to every airfield/battle that Squadron fought over the course of it's career.  Do the same for the Western Front etc.

 

As for different versions of the same plane/tank types, historical battles means historically fighting against the right plane version encountered regardless the performance differences.  Possibly make plane/tank/vehicle packs with 2-4 less commonly used types that help fill in all the gaps for each Front.

Edited by Drum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Drum said:

I agree, they could do different map packs that fill in the gaps of the Russian Northern, Central and Southern Fronts so when playing a career you'd move to every airfield/battle that Squadron fought over the course of it's career.  Do the same for the Western Front etc.

 

As for different versions of the same plane/tank types, historical battles means historically fighting against the right plane version encountered regardless the performance differences.  Possibly make plane/tank/vehicle packs with 2-4 less commonly used types that help fill in all the gaps for each Front.

 I tought also that it shold be good to make maps we have airplanes for, sell it with some SP campaign so i asked about if they plan to make single maps only and they said thats unlikely.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wohoo - Flugscheiben ftw!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111

 

With frickin‘ Laz0rs!

 

Battle of the Dark Side of the Moon confirmed!

 

BotDSotM will conquer the space sim niche ;)

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, [F.Circus]FrangibleCover said:

Problem is, again, that you need to find five German aircraft. The ANR was completely requipped to Bf 109s by 1945.

About Axis ( ANR) planeset 1945 for North Italy, I could suggest:

 

Mc 205 Veltro

Fiat G55

Re 2005

Me 109 G10

SM 79 Sparviero

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[F.Circus]FrangibleCover
2 hours ago, ITAF_Rani said:

About Axis ( ANR) planeset 1945 for North Italy, I could suggest:

 

Mc 205 Veltro

Fiat G55

Re 2005

Me 109 G10

SM 79 Sparviero

C. 205 - Gone by summer 1944, lasts longer in ACI service but not over Italy

G. 55 - Gone by November/December 1944

Re. 2005 - Gone by December 1944 apart from possibly a handful of ANR trainers

SM. 79 - In ANR service, but Gruppo Faggione flew a grand total of one mission in 1945

 

Italian aircraft really need an early 1944 setting or earlier, by 1945 it's wall-to-wall 109s and 190s in Italy. Allied strategic bombing wrecked the factories, and with the aircraft being impossible to replace, hard to repair and inferior to 1944 Allied types it's no surprise they were phased out.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alexmarine
3 hours ago, [F.Circus]FrangibleCover said:

Italian aircraft really need an early 1944 setting or earlier

 

Malta/Sicily 1942-1943 and we have a deal

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Jade_Monkey said:

 

No need to be a condescending twat. Just because someone has different preferences and enjoys different aspects of the sim than you do doesn't mean you can call them a child. Maybe you have some growing up to do yoursef.

 

 

When people cross their arms and say 'no!' to finishing the Eastern Front, solely on the basis of a map's visual excitement or lack thereof, the irrationality of the resistance does strike me as childish. 'But I wanna fly somewhere fun!' is the essence of the argument.

 

The Eastern Front was begun. It must be finished. It's already been delayed for two production cycles. The other 3 major nationalities of the sim get to fly the end-war technology. Only the Russians are left out. This is a matter of fairness as much as anything else. 

 

Being considerate of what other people want and, dare I say need at this point, regardless of your own wants--that's mature behavior. Immature behavior is saying I don't care what other people want/need, I want X more, even when X (in this case, a Mediterranean DLC) is obviously less historically important than the goddamn final battle for Berlin or its immediate environs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alexmarine
18 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

 'But I wanna fly somewhere fun!' 

 

"Where" is personally irrelevant for me, the "what" I am going to fly is where you get or don't get my interest. The "where" just follows that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alexmarine said:

"Where" is personally irrelevant for me, the "what" I am going to fly is where you get or don't get my interest. The "where" just follows that.

 

Agreed.

 

I'd also like to mention that the prices for these DLC packages are so low compared to DCS' prices for a single plane, it strikes me as doubly absurd to act like it's a bad deal if the map isn't exciting. 8 planes for the basic package, 10 for the deluxe. The map, in that context, is worth a fraction of the total amount you're paying. It's not like you're paying 50 bucks alone for a map you can't stand.

 

Even with inevitable plane redundancy, if you like even 1 or 2 planes in a given DLC package, you're really not getting screwed for value. Especially on a sale.

 

Just to clarify my stance on this issue: it's not about me saying what people are 'allowed' to enjoy in the sim. If you like scenery, great; if it's a big deal to you, great.

 

The problem arises when people are either tacitly or explicitly arguing that the Eastern Front needn't be finished ever, or to kick the can down the road for yet another DLC to come before the Battle of Berlin (or whatever it'll be called), because eastern Germany's map is too boring. That's where lines need to be drawn.

 

I don't have an issue with Bodenplatte and Normandy being made first. But the time has clearly come for the Eastern Front to be wrapped up. To delay it again for the sake of the Mediterranean would just be ridiculous. And unfair to Russian fliers. And unfair from a historical emphasis perspective.

 

Once Berlin's done, then we can, with a clear conscience, ask the devs to make DLC in places we'd like to vacation in and fight a virtual war in.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

JV69badatflyski
On 11/25/2021 at 7:31 PM, [F.Circus]FrangibleCover said:

 

For Italy 1945 there are Allied options, YP-80 being the big meme pick and A-26 being the selling point. 

 

:lol: Good luck to find the YP80data....there were more "glocke" flying than those 2 prototypes (sarc ;) )

 

22 hours ago, oc2209 said:

 

It's true that the Ta-152 and He-162 have laughably short and uneventful service records; but if there's reliable information on where they operated from (on paper, anyway, if not in practice for fuel shortages and the like) and in what configurations they theoretically operated with, then that's at least a bare minimum of data.

 

A P-39Q would be inferior in most respects to a Yak-9U. Especially in a 1945 scenario. I don't see the point. Only the P-63 would be a viable replacement for the 9U in terms of capability.

 

 


Yes, indeed, there is no trace of the P63 on eastfront, the 152 and the 162 are at least rather well documented (technicaly and historicaly) as for the p39, and for a funny read, i advice the following discussion  , be carefull, it's more than 200pages long.

 

28 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

 

But the time has clearly come for the Eastern Front to be wrapped up. To delay it again for the sake of the Mediterranean would just be ridiculous. And unfair to Russian fliers. And unfair from a historical emphasis perspective.

 

Yes, Kursk Area is still missing and Kurland. Those are 2 areas that saw a lot of action. 
And also the 2 areas need the least work (always easy to say it's easy....) on the airplanes. YAk-3/9U/La-7/...let's make a fi156 for the lufties, we got the rest :biggrin:
The kurland map in 46 was my favorite map, just missing 200km's to the north and 100 the west.
I'd rather have an east map than the normandy btw.

 

18 hours ago, Vig said:

You know that this is what y'all want:

 

 

Miethe disc 3-way2.jpg

You got the wrong model pal, this was the staff transport gerätt,
For the combat experience, try this :biggrin:
spacer.png

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...