Does the first PTO installment/first installment with Japanese planes need to be a carrier battle?

[Enceladus828]

By this point, if the devs unable to do a carrier battle like Midway, but are able to do Burma, Singapore, or Guadalcanal as their starting point for the PTO and the data they have for the FMs are better than those in IL-2 1946 and War Thunder then I'm cool with that.

[BladeMeister]

CARRIER BATTLE!!!!!!!?

ABSOLUTELY!!!!!!!

I WANT CARRIER OPS!!!!

                

 

S!Blade<><?

[=gRiJ=Roman-]

The second and third options are very similar to me ... 

[Missionbug]

I go with the second option, better to get there for those who desperately want it than not at all.

 

Personally I prefer land based aviation, Burma and Singapore would certainly scratch the Far east itch, or the Dutch East Indies would be good, then again I have no problem with the Solomon Islands.

 

Take care and be safe.

 

Wishing you all the very best, Pete.

[blue_max]

New Guinea is the most obvious choice. Awesome battles, fairly evenly matched plane set, you can get away with the difficult to model (for the current engine) naval stuff. No brainer!

[BladeMeister]

BOO! BOO! BOO!

Carrier Ops is the way to go! Maybe not Midway, but there are plenty of opportunities for CARRIER OPS!!!

 

MERRY CHRISTMAS EVE!

??????????

 

S!Blade<><?

[Ribbon]

Midway was planned as first battle when PTO was announced.

Also they could go with 6 aircraft planeset; Wildcat, Dauntless, Devastator, Zero, Val and Kate.

Premium/collector plane B26 since soon we'll get b25 ?

[SYN_Vander]

46 minutes ago, =VARP=Ribbon said:

Midway was planned as first battle when PTO was announced.

Also they could go with 6 aircraft planeset; Wildcat, Dauntless, Devastator, Zero, Val and Kate.

Premium/collector plane B26 since soon we'll get b25 ?

 

I think for all scenarios you can come up with a 6 aircraft plane set. For instance this:

but take away the Hurricane (is already a colectors plane anyway) and the Mitsubishi Ki-30 and you stil have a great ' Battle' edition.

[Gambit21]

Carriers were more of an intermittent side-show, and were completely absent from any action for 18 months of the war following the Guadalcanal landings.

So while I'd want carriers eventually, I see no rush. The rubber meets the road in PTO in land-based campaigns, not 3 day carrier battles...as cool as they are.

DCS has set high marks for carriers, and just wait until Magnitude 3 releases their carrier with the Corsair. It's going to be stunning.

I wouldn't want this team to rush anything as they'll have their work cut out for them.

 

 

 

Edited December 24, 2021 by Gambit21

[BMA_FlyingShark]

Option 2 for me.

As much as I would like to see carriers one day in this great series, nothing goes above landing an early P-40 on a strip of dirt in the middle of a jungle.

 

Have a nice day.

 

[Gambit21]

10 minutes ago, FlyingShark said:

Option 2 for me.

As much as I would like to see carriers one day in this great series, nothing goes above landing an early P-40 on a strip of dirt in the middle of a jungle.

 

Have a nice day.

 

 

Aye - or a Zero, or a Corsair, or a Wildcat.

[CountZero]

Carriers or they go bust if they even go PTO. I dont see how they can make any money making first PTO DLC without carriers. Its like making any euro ww2 DLC without 109/190 combo.

[BMA_FlyingShark]

8 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

 

Aye - or a Zero, or a Corsair, or a Wildcat.

Yeah, those too.

 

Have a nice day.

 

[Gambit21]

17 minutes ago, CountZero said:

Carriers or they go bust if they even go PTO. I dont see how they can make any money making first PTO DLC without carriers. Its like making any euro ww2 DLC without 109/190 combo.

 

No it isn’t.

Go read some books my friend.

Your analogy is completely off the mark.

[Trooper117]

Guadalcanal or Malaya/Singapore... nuff said!

[No105_Swoose]

16 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

Guadalcanal or Malaya/Singapore... nuff said!

Yes! Keep.It.Simple.Stupid principle.  New Guinea 1942-1943 would also yield a good, land-based plane set that may make for an achievable, not overly complicated PTO DLC.  

[357th_KW]

As Gambit keeps stating, the land based (and cruiser/destroyer/transport) battles were far more prevalent then the brief carrier clashes.  A module built around a single carrier battle would have a 2-3 day long career mode, featuring a couple sorties at most.  A land based module focused on the Solomons, New Guinea, the Philippines or Okinawa could be built with no carriers, and then have functional carriers added later.  Further, any of those land based campaigns could leverage a number of the existing USAAF planes, allowing the devs to really build out the Allied side of the plane set, which helps offset what would likely have to be a fairly lean Japanese set.

[CountZero]

On 12/24/2021 at 10:01 PM, VBF-12_KW said:

As Gambit keeps stating, the land based (and cruiser/destroyer/transport) battles were far more prevalent then the brief carrier clashes.  A module built around a single carrier battle would have a 2-3 day long career mode, featuring a couple sorties at most.  A land based module focused on the Solomons, New Guinea, the Philippines or Okinawa could be built with no carriers, and then have functional carriers added later.  Further, any of those land based campaigns could leverage a number of the existing USAAF planes, allowing the devs to really build out the Allied side of the plane set, which helps offset what would likely have to be a fairly lean Japanese set.

With early carrier DLC you can have SP campaign starting at Pearl Harbor and having all other early carrier vs carrier battles like coral sea, santa cruz and so on, its not just 2-3 day... You make Battle of Midway as main point of DLC but you add onother map of Hawaii for SP, its not like maps are demanding so they cant make 2, and one just sea map for other carrier battles where you can use same planset.

 

Solomons you can do it but its again to big for game, New Guinea also, but Philipines and Okinawa you dont have any japan oposition on island after landings all important happend before so you have to have carriers for them, after it Japan forces are coming from so far places that historical map is imposible for them.

 

But 100% you aint gona see any PTO in this game so you can wish what ever you wont ?

 

[No105_Swoose]

26 minutes ago, CountZero said:

 

 

But 100% you aint gona see any PTO in this game so you can wish what ever you wont ?

 

@CountZero is probably right.  As much as I'd REALLY like to see either a carrier- or land-based PTO or CBI DLC module, I doubt it's going to happen.  At least not the first DLC after the completion and release of the Battle of Normandy map.  I think it's more likely we'll see a late war Eastern Front DLC, e.g. Operation Bagration 1944 or Berlin 1945.  A late war Eastern Front DLC would "round out" the Germany versus USSR conflict where we already have Moscow, Stalingrad, and the Kuban.  The developers are Russian; they'd probably like to do it.  There's a lot of information on late war Soviet and German aircraft, etc.  Just my two cents.  Nobody except Jason and the developers know the business plan and future of IL-2: Great Battles so it's all speculation what's after Battle of Normandy.

[Gambit21]

9 hours ago, CountZero said:

With early carrier DLC you can have SP campaign starting at Pearl Harbor and having all other early carrier vs carrier battles like coral sea, santa cruz and so on, its not just 2-3 day... 

 

Yes it is. Carrier battles are few and far between, and each part of different campaigns/portions of the war. 

After the Battle of Eastern Solomons it was a year and a half before another took place, meanwhile during that time the war was basically won and lost.

Read some books my friend. Further, within each short carrier battle, an individual pilot flew between 1 and 3 sorties at most on average.

Hardly the makings of a "career" So the entire career portion of the product that they took the trouble and expense to create would be completely nullified by a release dealing only with a carrier battle. 

 

 

9 hours ago, CountZero said:

 

You make Battle of Midway as main point of DLC but you add onother map of Hawaii for SP, its not like maps are demanding so they cant make 2, and one just sea map for other carrier battles where you can use same planset.

 

No carrier battle is suitable as a focus for a full release other than recognizable name...because again these were short battles, not campaigns.

 

 

9 hours ago, CountZero said:

 

Solomons you can do it but its again to big for game,

 

More than one way around this, as has been stated over and over and over again.

 

 

9 hours ago, CountZero said:

 

New Guinea also,

 

More than possible, just like you can have a module based in Germany without creating an entire map of Germany.

 

9 hours ago, CountZero said:

 

 

but Philipines and Okinawa you dont have any japan oposition

 

Bull Puckey - Battle of Leyte Gulf!

Again though...3 days.

 

 

 

 

9 hours ago, CountZero said:

 

But 100% you aint gona see any PTO in this game so you can wish what ever you wont ?

 

 

 

It has to...no choice but to do so eventually.

[BladeMeister]

5 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

It has to...no choice but to do so eventually.

THIS! But, they have to put Carrier ops in one way or another or I will not buy it. End of Story!

You hear that 1C, no C Ops, no Mula from me!

 

S!Blade<><

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, BladeMeister said:

THIS! But, they have to put Carrier ops in one way or another or I will not buy it. End of Story!

You hear that 1C, no C Ops, no Mula from me!

 

S!Blade<><

 

That’s asking a lot from the dev team I think. I want them set up to succeed, not fail. Thus I’d rather they take their time with the carrier tech...and it IS tech. It’s not just a matter of modeling a boat.

 

 

[Danziger]

I think it would be good for them to follow how they are handling Europe. Start close to the end and work backward in time. 

[BladeMeister]

5 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

 

That’s asking a lot from the dev team I think. I want them set up to succeed, not fail. Thus I’d rather they take their time with the carrier tech...and it IS tech. It’s not just a matter of modeling a boat.

 

 

That is asking a lot, but they are capable of a lot. 1C has proved it time and again. Revamping the desaterous BOS points grind WT gameplay style, reworking landing physics, adding career, reworking ground tiles on all maps, integration of DirectX 11, reworking damage model, reworking ME to produce AQMB, new clouds, new fuel systems(near completion), VR implantation, integration of TC, plus many other upgrades not to mention all of the actual planes developed and added. 1C can handle Carrier Ops. Maybe model only the carrier topside ops only and possibly in the future mod them to supercarrier ops as DCS has done? I agree, 1C has to do what will provide success in the PTO, but IMHO Carrier Ops would be successful for them. We can agree to disagree on this subject, but in the end, they have to go to the PTO sooner or later. Personally, I see Italy, Malta and or the Med as their next landing point, but what do I know???

 

S!Blade<><

[Gambit21]

2 hours ago, BladeMeister said:

That is asking a lot, but they are capable of a lot. 1C has proved it time and again. Revamping the desaterous BOS points grind WT gameplay style, reworking landing physics, adding career, reworking ground tiles on all maps, integration of DirectX 11, reworking damage model, reworking ME to produce AQMB, new clouds, new fuel systems(near completion), VR implantation, integration of TC, plus many other upgrades not to mention all of the actual planes developed and added. 1C can handle Carrier Ops. Maybe model only the carrier topside ops only and possibly in the future mod them to supercarrier ops as DCS has done? I agree, 1C has to do what will provide success in the PTO, but IMHO Carrier Ops would be successful for them. We can agree to disagree on this subject, but in the end, they have to go to the PTO sooner or later. Personally, I see Italy, Malta and or the Med as their next landing point, but what do I know???

 

S!Blade<><

 

Absolutely, but all of that did not happen within the space of one release cycle.

 Of course carrier ops would be successful. My point is that it's a big leap in tech for them, and DCS is already doing it and doing it very well. Thus this team is left with the task of establishing carrier tech and being compared to what DCS has already done, AND create a bunch of new aircraft. 

 

You can like carrier ops as much as you want, I like them too. It's just that I have a different perspective (based on a lot of study on the PTO) on their actual role in the war as a whole and thus their actual necessity (out of the gate.) Carrier ops do not define the PTO, although they may define it to those with a limited knowledge of the subject and the scope of that theater.  Yes carrier ops are cool...no dispute there.

 

The smart thing to do IMHO is get PTO established, thus get that revenue coming in, THEN with that momentum establish carrier tech and release when it's ready. In the meantime the customer base has PTO content to purchase and fly.

 

That's the smart move IMHO.

If there was no such thing as DCS it might be a different story.

Edited December 29, 2021 by Gambit21

[DD_fruitbat]

 

2 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

 

The smart thing to do IMHO is get PTO established, thus get that revenue coming in, THEN with that momentum establish carrier tech and release when it's ready. In the meantime the customer base has PTO content to purchase and fly.

 

 

 

Completely agree Jim.

 

New Guinea, Burma or post invasion of Guadalcanal/Slot give fantastic options imo at face value (although I bow to your better knowledge on the air war in the PTO), and most importantly those campaigns that have length measured in months and years. 

 

One of the biggest problems of carriers is the development required for what were always very short engagements measured in days.

 

I love carrier ops, but carrier battles in reality were a tiny fraction of the air war in the PTO. 

Edited December 29, 2021 by DD_fruitbat

[StaB/Tomio_VR***]

I'm always stunned by how incomplete survey can be

There is not only Midway...

 

The biggest carrier battle of the Pacific is the Mariannas Battle

15 USN vs 9  IJN carriers

900 against 450 planes (+200 ground based japanese planes)

 

Yes It has to be with carriers and Mariannas offers a wider variety of planes, carriers and islands !

 

Edited December 30, 2021 by StaB/Tomio_VR***

[BladeMeister]

18 minutes ago, StaB/Tomio_VR*** said:

I'm always stunned by how incomplete survey can be

There is not only Midway...

 

The biggest carrier battle of the Pacific is the Mariannas Battle

15 USN vs 9  IJN carriers

900 against 450 planes (+200 ground based japanese planes)

 

Yes It has to be with carriers and Mariannas offers a wider variety of planes, carriers and islands !

 

Tell it?Brother!!!

 

S!Blade<><

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, StaB/Tomio_VR*** said:

I'm always stunned by how incomplete survey can be

There is not only Midway...

 

The biggest carrier battle of the Pacific is the Mariannas Battle

15 USN vs 9  IJN carriers

900 against 450 planes (+200 ground based japanese planes)

 

Yes It has to be with carriers and Mariannas offers a wider variety of planes, carriers and islands !

 

 

Yeah an interesting battle that lasted for 2 days out of the entire war.

Where are the Japanese land bases? Where's the campaign? Where's the meat for the career mode?

Fun? Absolutely - for 2 - 4 sorties then you have to start making things up.

 

Horrible idea for several reasons, not the least of which is that ED is already releasing a Marianas map.

An un-horrible idea however would be a Solomons map which gives you Operation Watchtower (carriers, Guadalcanal landings) AND the Battle of the Eastern Solomons, (carrier battle) as well as the islands themselves for the 6 month brawl afterwards for Guadalcanal AND the island hopping up the Slot for more months of action afterwords. 

 

Carrier battles have set historical outcomes, either a carrier got sunk or it didn't. 

That's pretty limiting if you're after historical scenarios...few guys really think about that one.

This means whether a carrier get's sunk or not has to be scripted, otherwise your into "what if" territory which is fine I'm all for that...just know that this is where you're treading.

 

Edited December 30, 2021 by Gambit21

[BladeMeister]

Oh your bloody right Gambit21, but I still want Carrier Ops!!! I want my Wildcat, Hellcat, Dauntless, Corsair and Avenger on the wooden deck of some US steel while it bucks up and down a bit from an angry sea swelling beneath it. I want to set some A6Ms alight and dive bomb those meatball painted decks of those Jap Carriers and send them to the bottom. Give me Carrier Ops or give me dea... Or give me something else!!!

 

S!Blade<><

[DBFlyguy]

I'd love carrier ops... but they are NOT needed for a first pacific release.  Most air combat in the pacific theatre had nothing to do with carriers anyway.  Just give us something, I think that would please most of us waiting patiently.  New Guinea... CBI... Solomons... something.

[BMA_FlyingShark]

More P40 versions, early and late and any Japanese opposition, that alone would be enough for me.

 

Have a nice day.

 

[Trooper117]

8 minutes ago, FlyingShark said:

More P40 versions,

 

Not if they are anything like the version we already have...

[DBFlyguy]

2 hours ago, Trooper117 said:

 

Not if they are anything like the version we already have...

Seems that FM's to aircraft have a better chance actually getting looked at if there is another variant currently being developed, so bring on the P-40F, M or N....and a P-47D-4  for that matter cause well, you now....maybe third time will finally be a charm

[Hoss]

This is all kind of moot if Jason and team can not find the data they need to build high fidelity Japanese plane sets. Wouldn't be fun using the La-5 and 109 as Japanese fighters, and Pe-2's as stand in bombers on a Pacific map.  The bad thing about getting old is I will probably never see Jason's Pacific based game. 

 

Cheers

[Gambit21]

Well they have to flex away from the 5 x 5 formula for PTO.

The good news is that there's at least 5 variants of the Zeke that they can make flyable as they go, along with a handful of Oscar variants.

 

 

 

 

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

19 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

Well they have to flex away from the 5 x 5 formula for PTO.

The good news is that there's at least 5 variants of the Zeke that they can make flyable as they go, along with a handful of Oscar variants.

 

 

 

 

 

I think there are only two full modules of PTO anyway; early and late. I think you can keep a 5x5 format. There’s enough for several premiums, including float and sea planes.

Edited December 30, 2021 by II/JG17_HerrMurf

[Redwo1f]

Did I miss some official announcement of some kind? - just wondering.

[Gambit21]

13 minutes ago, Redwo1f said:

Did I miss some official announcement of some kind? - just wondering.

 

Nope

18 minutes ago, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

 

I think there are only two full modules of PTO anyway; early and late. I think you can keep a 5x5 format. There’s enough for several premiums, including float and sea planes.

 

Between Solomons, New Guinea, Burma, then late stuff and all the maps, you have at least 5 possible, minimally 4.

and yes...sea/float planes. I so want these. 

 

Also if you can do an A6M2 (and you can) you can do a Rufe.

 

I can also see Early and Late method...with various aircraft and separate DLC maps for each.

Edited December 30, 2021 by Gambit21

[DD_Arthur]

On 12/24/2021 at 3:40 PM, CountZero said:

Carriers or they go bust if they even go PTO. I dont see how they can make any money making first PTO DLC without carriers. Its like making any euro ww2 DLC without 109/190 combo.

 

Agree with the Count.  We've had five instalments of the same thing; ground based, tactical airwar.  Fair enough, there was a lot of it.

 

 

But do we really need more of it?  Another round of the usual porridge over a sea of green?  Do we need carrier battles?  Perhaps not but do we need carriers?

 

Absolutely.