Jump to content


Photo

Thread to gather your suggestions


  • Please log in to reply
559 replies to this topic

#521 CZEforzamike

CZEforzamike
  • Founder
  • Posts: 105
  • Location:Prague, Czech republic

Posted 21 October 2016 - 09:43

Type of Improvement: SOUND - pilot "G" effects

Explanation of Proposal: It will be great to add some G-effect sounds of breathing pilot.
This effect is in DCS filght simulator and it sounds really good! Feel of like "yeas i am really in the plane".
Maybe it is not so hard to do something like this! It is only the sound, not graphic or physics parts. And it really helps to reality feeling!

look at this short video thats showing what i am meaning
https://www.youtube....h?v=CVgmDAMt3a0

Benefits: better simulation of "be part of cockpit"


  • 2

#522 actionjoe

actionjoe
  • Member
  • Posts: 56
  • Location:Nord, France

Posted 22 October 2016 - 21:16

Type of Improvement: Interface

Explanation of Proposal: Warn the user that his track has stopped recording through a pop up window (like in ROF) or make the record of a new track automatic once the previous has reached his maximum size.

Benefits: avoid good action (possible screens or video) to be lost because the pilot hasn't see the tiny record icon disappear without a warn.


  • 1

#523 TunaEatsLion

TunaEatsLion
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1133

Posted 26 October 2016 - 11:04



Type of Improvement: game assets
Explanation of Proposal: Barrage balloons
Benefits: additional (currently missing) object over target would make gameplay more interesting, reference design as it available in other sims like ROF.
  • 0

#524 Trupobaw

Trupobaw
  • Founder
  • Posts: 637

Posted 26 October 2016 - 11:37

Type of Improvement:  Miscellaneous

Explanation of Proposal:  Once Battle of Kuban is complete, convert existing RoF Channel Map and include it as bonus content (Vielkye Luki/Odessa style).
Benefits:  Re-uses existing content to give mission makers means for creation of missions over Channel Front in 1941/1942. The IL2 planeset after release of BoK (Spitfire Mark V, Bf-109 F variants, FW-190 A3, bombers) will be sufficient to represent Circus-style operations and fighter sweeps typical for that area and period. The minimal changes required for this to work would be redesigning airfields to service WW2 planes and removal of no mans land, leaving settlements and man-made structures in 1919 state.


Edited by Trupobaw, 26 October 2016 - 11:38.

  • 3

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam (Engl: Also, RoF skinpacks need to be released).

P3u0DtN.jpg
 


#525 TunaEatsLion

TunaEatsLion
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1133

Posted 08 November 2016 - 18:17

Type of Improvement: units in missions
Explanation of Proposal: reduce CPU load for trains moving on maps in the same way ships were optimized.
Benefits: Give mission makers means for creation of missions with greater number of units while keeping server operation more stable. 99% of MP maps currently avoid using trains due to server load.
  • 1

#526 FlyingShark

FlyingShark
  • Founder
  • Posts: 241
  • Location:Belgium

Posted 09 November 2016 - 17:37

Type of Improvement: Choose from different bases for navigation

Explanation of Proposal: Let us choose from a drop down menu, like with commands and pilot gestures or with a bind key, to what base the radio navigation in planes that have it guides us.

Benefits: More realistic navigation, not just get guided to the nearest airfield by radio navigation, without the need to model the whole tuning procedure which the devs have stated they will very unlikely model.

 

:salute:


  • 5

No more mister nice guy!


#527 LLv34_Temuri

LLv34_Temuri
  • Member
  • Posts: 372

Posted 10 November 2016 - 08:42

Type of Improvement: Option to hide airfield usage in multiplayer.

Explanation of Proposal: Currently in multiplayer, you can see from which airfield enemies are operating from as the active airfields have dots on them based on the airfield usage. Add an option (to Dserver configuration?) to that hides the dots.

Benefits: Improved realism in multiplayer, as you then wouldn't know the exact airfield where the enemies are taking off.


  • 3

32ux.jpg


#528 LLv34_Temuri

LLv34_Temuri
  • Member
  • Posts: 372

Posted 10 November 2016 - 08:49

Type of Improvement: Missions

Explanation of Proposal: Currently, it's not possible to change the country of a static block with linked entity created during mission. Make this possible.

Benefits: Enables more dynamic missions where some ground targets can switch side and thus become valid targets for ground attack/bombing.


  • 1

32ux.jpg


#529 216th_Jordan

216th_Jordan
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1449

Posted 15 November 2016 - 13:21

Type of Improvement: Gameplay

 

In game implemented tutorial for beginners. (Important that it is not outside of the game)

 

 

Explanation of Proposal:

 

New players to this genre are very important and there are quite some of them, however most people quickly give up because the have no guidance in the very important exploration of the game.

This splits into two parts:

1.) Setting up the game properly and which commands are needed for what. 

2.) Explaining basics of flight and what to watch out for, what to expect when flying a plane. 

 

One of my ideas would be:

Both Parts could be made as Training missions with annotations.

 

There would the a set of smaller missions explaining:

1.) Game setup and basic taxiing + differential braking explanation on german and soviet planes.

2.) Flight in a controlled environment, like through some markers.

3.) Take-off

4.) Landing

5.) Take-off, flight and landing

6.) Shooting skills with different dummy targets

7.) Full mission with some easy AI attacking airfield where player needs to take-off, defend and land again.

 

In the main menu these mission should be found at TUTORIALS.

 

 

Benefits:  

 

- Helping this niche market grow a little bit more by giving a proper introduction to people new to flight sims. 

- Reputation gain.

- New players feel like they are being cared for and have a fun way to get a grip in this wonderful sim.


Edited by 216th_Jordan, 15 November 2016 - 13:24.

  • 4

System Specifications:        I4820k - overclocked to 4.6 GHz    |    16 GB DDR3 Ram - 1600 MHz      |      Gtx 1070

Operating System/Apps:     Windows 10      |       TrackIR v5.4       |       T.A.R.G.E.T. profile (Hotas Warthog)

Hardware:                          ProFlight Rudder pedals      |      HOTAS Warthog       |        TrackIR with LEDclip


#530 12.OIAE_Stick-95

12.OIAE_Stick-95
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1377
  • Location:US

Posted 26 November 2016 - 20:49

Weather Report

 

Type of improvement: Game Play

 

Explanation of proposals: The Briefing Screen information created by mission makers for wind speed and direction is many times only partial, incorrect or non-existent.  Currently in the game the full Weather Report (wind speeds and directions at various altitudes) is only available to pilots of bombers when in the bomb sight by pulling down the Cloud icon.  I believe this information would have been available to all pilots prior to take off.  My suggestion is to make the same Cloud icon opening the Weather Report available in two places; 1. the Briefing Screen, 2, the Map (O).  The game should provide this information to all pilots without relying on mission makers.   

 

Benefits: This will allow all pilots to assess the effect of winds on choice of aircraft, runway, attack approach, ordnance, etc., before spawning in.  Once flying, having it available on the Map (O) will allow better navigation for fighter pilots in heavier winds at altitude.  It will also allow all pilots to recheck wind speed and direction prior to approach for landing.


Edited by 12.OIAE_Stick-95, 26 November 2016 - 20:49.

  • 3

It's only a game...  It's only a game...  It's only a... damn it.

New system 08/16 - i7 6700K @ 4.6GHz, GTX1070SC ACX 3.0 8GB, 16GB DDR4 3000MHz, ASUS Z170-A ATX mobo, Windows 10

30284612591_3787866a3c_m.jpg   PACIFIC THEATER  29752931474_6ac9ec5dd3_m.jpg


#531 OBT-moomoon

OBT-moomoon
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2

Posted 27 November 2016 - 17:39

Type of Improvement: difficulty settings in single player campaign

Explanation of Proposal: Let us tweek difficulty/realism as for quick mission (and not only two setting "full real" and "easy").

Benefits: let everyone play the campaign the way he wants to. I'd like to play with engine "complex" setting but still be able to enjoy exterior views.


  • 0

#532 Juri_JS

Juri_JS
  • Founder
  • Posts: 916

Posted 28 November 2016 - 08:07

Type of Improvement: Add more aircraft skins without letter/number codes.

Explanation of Proposal: Fully marked aircraft skins are useless for mission builders that need a single skin that can be used for a whole flight. To avoid too much additional work for the team, my suggestion is to release the official skins in two versions, one fully marked and the second without letter/number codes.

Benefits: More aircraft skins that can be used by mission builders.


  • 1

#533 darthdooboss

darthdooboss
  • Founder
  • Posts: 39
  • Location:MADRID

Posted 28 November 2016 - 20:17

Type of Improvement: Add more objects like trenchs, machine gun positions, bunkers etc.

Explanation of Proposal: More targets for A/S attacks.

Benefits: IMMO


  • 2

#534 1./TG1_Nil

1./TG1_Nil
  • Founder
  • Posts: 782

Posted 29 November 2016 - 00:05

Type of Improvement:  Gameplay
Explanation of Proposal: Add a co pilot station to the ju52 without sharing the handling of the plane, just an additional " view station" 
Benefits: The right side visibility of the plane is very poor because of the very wide cockpit, so it will be good to check the right view of the plane (third engine) using the co pilot seat. 

 

Look at the attached picture to check the views from the pilot perspective.

Attached Thumbnails

  • ju52 1.JPG
  • ju52 2.JPG
  • ju52 3.JPG

  • 2

What is 1./TG1? Il2 BoX very first virtual Transport squadron! http://airlifter.wix...m/tg1airlifters Visit our DISCORD CHANNEL to fly with us!

B1Omr3.jpg


#535 darthdooboss

darthdooboss
  • Founder
  • Posts: 39
  • Location:MADRID

Posted 01 December 2016 - 18:31

Type of Improvement: Avoid to spawn player aircraft over enemy positions

Explanation of Proposal: In this case almost 90% damaged the player

Benefits: Not more dissappointing mission beginning

 

Type of Improvement: Enemy aircrafts hang on over the target

Explanation of Proposal: Almost 90% of the missions the enemy aircrafts were in the target vertical. Try to put randomly around it

Benefits: Gameplay, more random and real mission


  • 0

#536 1./TG1_Nil

1./TG1_Nil
  • Founder
  • Posts: 782

Posted 07 December 2016 - 04:12

Type of Improvement: Gameplay

Explanation of Proposal: Make the player gunner reload automatically  his MG15 gun (Bf110, He111 and Ju52)

Benefits: No need to press the "reload" button anymore, make player focus more on shooting, makes gunnery more friendly without making it less realistic.


  • 0

What is 1./TG1? Il2 BoX very first virtual Transport squadron! http://airlifter.wix...m/tg1airlifters Visit our DISCORD CHANNEL to fly with us!

B1Omr3.jpg


#537 Juri_JS

Juri_JS
  • Founder
  • Posts: 916

Posted 12 December 2016 - 17:38

Type of Improvement: Increase the visibility distance of the "land_canvas" object.

Explanation of Proposal: At the moment the canvas object only pops up at a distance of 1000 m. This is much too low when used for ground-to-air signals.

Benefits: Ability to see ground-to-air signals at a greater distance.


  • 0

#538 CZEforzamike

CZEforzamike
  • Founder
  • Posts: 105
  • Location:Prague, Czech republic

Posted 14 December 2016 - 13:04

Type of Improvement: GRAPHICS effects


Explanation of Proposal: will be able to see pilot body in the cockpit view? Like is in DCF and War thunder!
Like is in this video (skip to 0.59s)
https://www.youtube....W3t6PUQ6g&t=46s


- It will be great to see more smoke and particle effect for bombs dropping and for flak cannon too
- now is almost invisible - after bomb explode there is no smoke anywhere or is for only a just one second...
- the same is for plane crash... no smoke, no fire... just effect for one second

 

Benefits: better immersion 


  • 3

#539 RavN_Sone

RavN_Sone
  • Member
  • Posts: 12

Posted 16 December 2016 - 18:22

Type of Improvement: Control
Explanation of Proposal: additional mapping options for right+left wheel brakes (one axis, centered); edit: half range deadzone?
Benefits: posibility to utilise more centered axes of game controllers (rudders and mini joysticks), more control options thus better accessibility; explanation: https://forum.il2stu...opers/?p=420088


Type of Improvement: Interface
Explanation of Proposal: possibility to check specification for every aircraft in game, non-dependant on whether player owns them himself
Benefits: clearer, more accessible information about in-game plane characteristics, for everybody, not only specific plane owners


Type of Improvement: Interface
Explanation of Proposal: option to select a custom flight record tracks location
Benefits: possibility to record more tracks when drive is full, possibility to preserve space and lifespan of certain drives (eg game on SSD, tracks on HDD)


Edited by Sone, 16 December 2016 - 18:59.

  • 0

#540 Thad

Thad
  • Member
  • Posts: 348
  • Location:Ironton, Ohio USA

Posted 20 December 2016 - 17:40

Type of Improvement:  Miscellaneous

 

Explanation of Proposal:  Auto save and loading of 'individual' (different) crafts keymapping inputs by craft designation. When I select my craft/vehicle the appropriate saved controller input profile should automatically load up.

 

Benefits: Currently there is only one 'input' file created and placed in our data folder. Example, I have a tank control input scheme. If I want to fly a plane, any plane, I have to create a unique keymapping input for it. Doing this overwrites the current (tank) input profile. Unless I have manually saved my tank profile to another folder, I would have to remap everything for tank use. Rinse and repeat the problem. This is tedious and should not have to be dealt with manually by the players. Correcting this would make things much easier for all player. Making this process easier makes for a happier player.


Edited by wdboyds, 20 December 2016 - 17:40.

  • 2

Windows 10 64-Bit, AMD FX-8350 Eight-Core Processor , 32 GB RAM, GeForce GTX 1060 6GB @ 2560 x 1080, 60 Hz


#541 1./TG1_Nil

1./TG1_Nil
  • Founder
  • Posts: 782

Posted 21 December 2016 - 20:28

Type of Improvement:  Miscellaneous

 

Explanation of Proposal 1:  The campaign missions for Tante Ju would be much more interesting and encouraging if

 

-There is an option to fly in daylight as it is more agreeable for some pilot to fly in the daylight.

-There is a reward with experience points and even more If you take the classic cargo loadout, because we have to land.

il-2 2016-12-21 19-14-08.jpg

il-2 2016-12-21 20-21-31.jpg

 

-There are a choice between 3 missions types instead of 2 because Tante Ju has 3 possible loadout. Each time I want to fly the cargo, I have to try and try again so it is not practical.

il-2 2016-12-21 19-25-52.jpg

 

Explanation of Proposal 2: Flying in multiplayer would be much more interesting and encouraging if

there are "Support Points" in Multiplayer so the Transport Pilot are rewarded because right now they are NOT rewarded.

They are participate too! maybe an additional column in multiplayer statistics

il-2 2016-12-21 20-25-52.jpg

 

Benefits: Make flying Tante Ju much more interesting and encouraging . Pilot need to be rewarded whereas they fly fighters, bombers, or transports . Will make Transports more attractive (so more sales) with theses simple things.


  • 0

What is 1./TG1? Il2 BoX very first virtual Transport squadron! http://airlifter.wix...m/tg1airlifters Visit our DISCORD CHANNEL to fly with us!

B1Omr3.jpg


#542 6BLBird-Dog

6BLBird-Dog
  • Founder
  • Posts: 97
  • Location:England

Posted 04 January 2017 - 15:11

Suggestion: Save imputs under a profile name ie:Save as :Birds Bomber. or Birds Early Fighter or Birds 109 etc etc

 

Reason : Multiple configurations could be stored and applied for each aircraft type making controllers that do not have programmable software easier to configure for different types of aircraft as often commands set to buttons on one aircraft may not be needed on other aircraft ,this would also help FFB2 jockies and other controllers such as the Bodner.


Edited by 6BLBird-Dog, 04 January 2017 - 15:12.

  • 0
ASUS Sabertooth 990FX R2.0 AMD FX-8350@4GB Watercooled
2X8GB Crucial 1866 - 1x Sapphire 280-X  OC + 1x Sapphire Radeon R9 280X Vapor-X OC in X-Fire 1900X1200 Native res
OCZ AGILITY 3 240GB O/S WINDOWS 7 Home Premium OCZ AGILITY 4 240GB WESTERN DIGITAL 500GB

#543 76IAP-Black

76IAP-Black
  • Member
  • Posts: 47

Posted 05 January 2017 - 19:13

Type of Improvement: Visual

Explanation of Proposal: Pressing F2 for external, than again to get the enemy plane in external and than pressing F8 would focus the cam on my plane from the enemy position. Currently I can padlog just the enemy from my position, not other way round.

Benefits: Visual follow camera from enemies point of view


  • 0

bos_gold_en.pngbom_gold_en.png


#544 LLv34_Temuri

LLv34_Temuri
  • Member
  • Posts: 372

Posted 06 January 2017 - 09:13

Type of Improvement: Full mission editor / mission building

Explanation of proposals: Currently, if you want to draw a frontline to the map, you need to target link the icon MCUs to tell where the frontline goes. This is fine for small missions with near-static frontline. For larger, more dynamic missions, this is very cumbersome. Implement an icon type and logic that doesn't need icon MCU target linking. Instead client/server will automatically draw frontline between the new frontline type of icon MCUs that are currently active.

Benefit: Makes it a lot easier to use dynamic frontlines in big missions.


Edited by LLv34_Temuri, 06 January 2017 - 09:15.

  • 1

32ux.jpg


#545 [DBS]airdoc

[DBS]airdoc
  • Founder
  • Posts: 123

Posted 15 January 2017 - 17:34

Two suggestions to the developers :

 

1. Type of Improvement: Full mission editor / mission building

 

Explanation of proposals: currently, when bombers/aircraft with machine gun turrets are set to a specific route with waypoints using high priority, they do not defend themselves - gunners do not fire. If priority is set to medium, they deviate from the course in order to defend. It would be a great improvement for mission making to allow another priority option for waypoints, according to which the airplanes would still fly to their exact waypoints, but the gunners would fire against enemy. 

 

Benefit: new types of missions would be plausible - intercept bombers that still fly the designated route, stay in formation and fire at the same time. This would be a huge plus with the upcoming AI improvement.


 

 

2. Type of Improvement: camera options

 

Explanation of proposals: please allow for

a) increased max zoom option     ----- Current level of max zoom does allow for close tracking shots of a moving aircraft (max zoom in most other sims is about double that of BOS/BOM)

b) ability to adjust the velocity/rate of the F2 camera movement with WASD - Numpad keys (standard is too fast, not talking about the free camera)

c) increased max distance when using the F2 external camera.

d) hardware input sensitivity options to apply to the Alt+F2 cameras. For some reason, the mouse sensitivity changes affect this camera a lot less than the F2 camera, making it harder to do smooth movements.

e) the ability to control the Alt+F2 cameras with TrackIR. Now, when trackIR is on, the Y-axis of the alt+F2 cameras is automatically controlled by head movement, but not the X-axis (probably a bug)

 

Benefit: These are essential for movie making purposes.

 

thanks


Edited by [DBS]airdoc, 24 January 2017 - 15:27.

  • 1

#546 csThor

csThor
  • Founder
  • Posts: 584
  • Location:Germany

Posted 24 January 2017 - 12:15

Type of Improvement: Dedicated "Reconnaissance" loadout & mission type 
 
Explanation of proposals:
Since the release of both the Ju 52 (and especially the adaptations and new "mission types" for it) and BlackSix's "Ten days of autumn" campaign I have been doing some thinking and researching. First I bought "The Defense of Moscow 1941: The Northern Flank" which deals extensively with the Battle of Kalinin (the background for BlackSix's campaign) and fiddled a bit (offline) with the Ju 52 (for which I still have to find a control setup that I can work with). Then I had an idea how to enhance online gameplay possibilities by adding what is known as "The fog of War" while at the same time enhancing the survivability chances of bombers and ground-attackers by not providing everyone with advance knowledge where their targets could be located.
 
One problem I've had with online gameplay is both its fixation on fighters and fighter-bombers and the lack of a role for dedicated bombers or anything that isn't capable of quick hit&fade type of attacks (which is part of the reason I haven't flown online in years). Currently selecting a side online is by an airfield ... meaning both sides know where the other side is based and for the most part they also know their respective target areas. But what about adding the "Fog of War" by not showing any of these information on the map unless ... *insert drumroll here* ... someone made a dedicated reconnaissance sortie? Of course such information could gleaned from having aircraft (of any type) overfly an area - and this could be used as the "simplified" form of reconnaissance - but the Ju 52 has shown the devs are capable of doing much better and more sophisticated solutions. Here's my "complex reconnaissance" proposal:
 
We currently have four types of aircraft that were used in dedicated recon units: Bf 110, Ju 88 and both Pe-2. In reality those were usually specialized versions with onboard cameras, but for our purposes this would be going overboard. Instead a dedicated "reconnaissance" loadout could be used, which is but a copy of an aircraft without any droppable ordnance (aka no bombs). The exception here - if we were to follow historical accuracy to such a degree - would be the Bf 110 because their reconnaissance versions (C-5, E-3, F-3 and G-3) lacked the 20mm cannons in the nose, so for our purposes (E-2 and the future G-2) we'd need a "reconnaissance" loadout that features only the 7.92mm MG 17.
Using this "complex reconnaissance" would mean that aircraft of any other type overflying potential targets would create just a "Something's here" kind of information on the in-game map. Dedicated reconnaissance aircraft - meaning the mentioned types using the "reconnaissance" loadout" - would overfly an area and upon their safe return a more detailed information on what exactly is "there" would appear on the map (i.e. "20+ tanks moving SW" or "potential fuel distribution point"). 
 
This way we would gain both the "armed recon" that ground-attack units often flew just to find suitable targets could be used to find "something" (without knowing in detail what it is) while giving other aircraft another role for all those who do not necessarily wish to be part of the usual gangbang over the known targets. Side selection would have to be done before any information (maybe beyond some frontlines) is being displayed on the map and only when a side is selected the player gets to choose an airfield. This way, by withholding information that had to be gained from reconnaissance in WW2, we could achieve a less fighter-centric gameplay, generate a less hazardous environment for bombers, Il-2 or Stukas (because the other side may not really know where they will show up unless recon has identified key areas) and give players who don't wish to participate in the habitual dogfight over the target zones something to do.
 
Benefit: Enhanced options for online play, less pauper (fighter-centric) gameplay, more realism

  • 8

image.jpg


#547 LLv34_Untamo

LLv34_Untamo
  • Founder
  • Posts: 183
  • Location:Finland

Posted 27 January 2017 - 08:52

S!

 

Type of improvement:

RCON subtitle interface.

Explanation of proposals:

RCON interface call that works as the Subtitle MCU (prints text on the player's screen).

Benefits:

Most advanced server systems built around this game utilize external software to control the mission. The subtitle MCU is a bit inflexible in this approach. It would be great if we could send customised messages (including dynamic data, like player name) to players from the command software. It would be even greater, if the interface would allow the same flexibility as the subtitle MCU in that it can be sent to a one player / one side / all players, positioned, sized and colored as one pleases.


Edited by LLv34_Untamo, 27 January 2017 - 11:07.

  • 1

Intel i7-6700K@4GHz - 2x8GB 2666MHz DDR4 - Palit GTX 970 4GB - Windows 10 Pro 64-bit - 30" LG W3000H (2560x1600) - TM Warthog Stick + Cougar Throttle - wooden DIY pedals with Hall sensor - FreeTrack


#548 Martijnvdm

Martijnvdm
  • Founder
  • Posts: 639
  • Location:The Netherlands

Posted 27 January 2017 - 11:35

 

Type of Improvement: Dedicated "Reconnaissance" loadout & mission type 
 
Explanation of proposals:
Since the release of both the Ju 52 (and especially the adaptations and new "mission types" for it) and BlackSix's "Ten days of autumn" campaign I have been doing some thinking and researching. First I bought "The Defense of Moscow 1941: The Northern Flank" which deals extensively with the Battle of Kalinin (the background for BlackSix's campaign) and fiddled a bit (offline) with the Ju 52 (for which I still have to find a control setup that I can work with). Then I had an idea how to enhance online gameplay possibilities by adding what is known as "The fog of War" while at the same time enhancing the survivability chances of bombers and ground-attackers by not providing everyone with advance knowledge where their targets could be located.
 
One problem I've had with online gameplay is both its fixation on fighters and fighter-bombers and the lack of a role for dedicated bombers or anything that isn't capable of quick hit&fade type of attacks (which is part of the reason I haven't flown online in years). Currently selecting a side online is by an airfield ... meaning both sides know where the other side is based and for the most part they also know their respective target areas. But what about adding the "Fog of War" by not showing any of these information on the map unless ... *insert drumroll here* ... someone made a dedicated reconnaissance sortie? Of course such information could gleaned from having aircraft (of any type) overfly an area - and this could be used as the "simplified" form of reconnaissance - but the Ju 52 has shown the devs are capable of doing much better and more sophisticated solutions. Here's my "complex reconnaissance" proposal:
 
We currently have four types of aircraft that were used in dedicated recon units: Bf 110, Ju 88 and both Pe-2. In reality those were usually specialized versions with onboard cameras, but for our purposes this would be going overboard. Instead a dedicated "reconnaissance" loadout could be used, which is but a copy of an aircraft without any droppable ordnance (aka no bombs). The exception here - if we were to follow historical accuracy to such a degree - would be the Bf 110 because their reconnaissance versions (C-5, E-3, F-3 and G-3) lacked the 20mm cannons in the nose, so for our purposes (E-2 and the future G-2) we'd need a "reconnaissance" loadout that features only the 7.92mm MG 17.
Using this "complex reconnaissance" would mean that aircraft of any other type overflying potential targets would create just a "Something's here" kind of information on the in-game map. Dedicated reconnaissance aircraft - meaning the mentioned types using the "reconnaissance" loadout" - would overfly an area and upon their safe return a more detailed information on what exactly is "there" would appear on the map (i.e. "20+ tanks moving SW" or "potential fuel distribution point"). 
 
This way we would gain both the "armed recon" that ground-attack units often flew just to find suitable targets could be used to find "something" (without knowing in detail what it is) while giving other aircraft another role for all those who do not necessarily wish to be part of the usual gangbang over the known targets. Side selection would have to be done before any information (maybe beyond some frontlines) is being displayed on the map and only when a side is selected the player gets to choose an airfield. This way, by withholding information that had to be gained from reconnaissance in WW2, we could achieve a less fighter-centric gameplay, generate a less hazardous environment for bombers, Il-2 or Stukas (because the other side may not really know where they will show up unless recon has identified key areas) and give players who don't wish to participate in the habitual dogfight over the target zones something to do.
 
Benefit: Enhanced options for online play, less pauper (fighter-centric) gameplay, more realism

 

 

1000 + 

 

Make the hunt and search a worthwhile prelude to the missions and campaign.

 

Grt M

 

(I could only give one.... But you will have to forgive me that  :) )


  • 0

I7 4790K@4.7 GHz, MSI Z97 Gaming 5, Kingston HyperX Beast (t3) 16GB, MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X, Dell S2716DG, Samsung 850 Evo 500GB, Windows 10 64

   

         


#549 daliborsky

daliborsky
  • Member
  • Posts: 12

Posted 31 January 2017 - 23:27

Type of Improvement: launcher.exe - when close, stop the process too

Explanation of Proposal: when it is closed, it still runs in the background as a process.


  • 0

#550 Legioneod

Legioneod
  • Member
  • Posts: 139
  • Location:Louisiana

Posted 02 February 2017 - 07:33

Type of Improvement: Navigation map tools.

 

Explanation of Proposal: Have the ability to plot a course on the map in-game. Have info listed on the map like speed, time to course change, heading in degrees etc.

 

The ability to make a flight plan would help greatly with navigation in full realistic servers and missions.

 

I want the ability to plot my course with my speed, waypoints, etc. That way I can time each leg of the course and adjust my heading when it's time to change.

 

This would add much more immersion to the game and would help people navigate when there are no icons on the map.

 

 

Being able to plot a course etc. will be absolutely crucial in Midway where there are no visual aids to help in navigation. We will have to rely on our compass and our flight plan to get us home.

 

Basically: Add map tools so we can plot and follow a course in-game.


Edited by Legioneod, 02 February 2017 - 07:39.

  • 2

8oMspDd.jpg


#551 216th_Retnek

216th_Retnek
  • Founder
  • Posts: 196
  • Location:Old Europe

Posted 02 February 2017 - 19:39

Type of Improvement: Navigation map tools.

...

Please allow me to add my thoughts I already posted elsewhere, since it's nearly the same topic:

 

- If there was a navigator position in the crew (else than the pilot) - please draw a flight-path and the current position on the map of that plane. According to the abilities of the navigator, influenced by weather, daylight, wind, maybe radio beacons etc. If there is a human crew-member next to the pilot, drop that feature. Like in WW2 a competent pilot still has the duty (and a great personal interest) to follow the navigation by himself, too. But there was a reason for a crew in WW2 - this should be simulated as an advantage for multi-crew air-planes in Il2-BoX, too.

 

- The option to place my own plot (and notes) on my flight-map! It's still my job to know where I am, but when I klick on the map, there should be a point with time, speed, height and direction.


  • 2

#552 216th_Retnek

216th_Retnek
  • Founder
  • Posts: 196
  • Location:Old Europe

Posted 02 February 2017 - 19:46

Type of improvement: Gameplay / AI

Explanation of proposals: All crew-members should call out contacts on long range, ship-contacts at least (very much needed for recon over the Pacific).
 

Benefits: A justified advantage for pilots flying multi-crew planes. The method is present in the game already, just needs a refinement: order the gunners to attack ground targets combined with long range firing. As far as the guns reach they'll find those trucks in the forest! At the moment their abilities are a bit superhuman, so this methods need adaption.


  • 1

#553 307_Tomcat

307_Tomcat
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1290

Posted 03 February 2017 - 08:32

I would like to see in game players list (TAB) to be scrollable with addition of simple three category information if that player is flaying fighter, attacker or bomber plane type. If I would know that I could choose lacking plane type and better fulfill mission objectives.
  • 2

#554 LukeFF

LukeFF
  • Tester
  • Posts: 4850
  • Location:Redlands, California

Posted 03 February 2017 - 22:55

Type of improvement: weapons / interface

Explanation of proposals: allow the player to set the individual convergence settings for each type of machine gun / cannon mounted to one's plane, including the possibility of setting parallel convergence for nose-mounted weapons

Benefits: better simulation of how the weapons on planes were set up to converge. In particular, on German planes, the machine guns were set to different convergence values than the cannons. In some instances, planes like the Fw 190 would have three different convergence values (one for the MG 17s, one for the MG 151/20s, and one for the MG FF/Ms). Right now, we are stuck with one convergence value for all weapons, which is far from ideal.


  • 0

#555 F/JG300_Gruber

F/JG300_Gruber
  • Member
  • Posts: 617

Posted 06 February 2017 - 19:58


Type of improvement: weapons, historicity

 

Explanation of proposals: For german bombers, replace the current drop interval in seconds with a historically correct drop interval in meters, dependent on the plane's speed entered in the bombsight. For minimum alteration of the current bombsight (I know you are quite busy with BoK),  I suggest to allow 4 different presets, something in the order of 20, 50, 100 and 200m. German bombs being usually bigger (and the planes slower), they need wider spacing than on the Pe2. The 0.5s we currently have (noted as 60 or 70m on the Ju88 bomb release device) is barely sufficient for 250kg bombs and useless for anything bigger, as the blast effect are strongly overlapping each others.

 

But if you have time for it, it would be great to have the full range of settings (from 2.5m to 400m) with a special knob.

 

Benefits: Historical matching of how German release mechanism worked, better effectiveness of German bombs when dropped in sequence.


Edited by F/JG300_Gruber, 06 February 2017 - 20:05.

  • 1

#556 jeanba

jeanba
  • Founder
  • Posts: 253

Posted 28 February 2017 - 09:54

Type of Improvement: Instant success for scriopted campaigns

Explanation of Proposal:

In "1946", most players use "instant success" in scripted campaigns to switch to next mission as long as they finish the mission alive.

It would be good to have it in Bo(SMK).


  • 0

#557 F/JG300_Gruber

F/JG300_Gruber
  • Member
  • Posts: 617

Posted 03 March 2017 - 20:37

Type of improvement: weapons
 
Explanation of proposals: He111 H16, for the 4xSC250 + 16xSC50 loadout, change the dropping sequence. For now the sequence is dropping the SC250 first, which is not bad in itself but when you select 16 bombs (I don't know why you can't select all 20 of them) you drop the 250s and 12 50s, leaving you with only 4 SC50 in the right bay. It would make more sense to drop all the 50s first so that the 4 bombs left in the bay are the 250s.
 
Benefits: Make this loadout more useful, it is somewhat difficult to make good use of it for now.


Edited by F/JG300_Gruber, 03 March 2017 - 20:38.

  • 0

#558 NoMoreSteam

NoMoreSteam
  • Member
  • Posts: 13
  • Location:Bükkszenterzsébet, Europe

Posted 07 March 2017 - 00:00

 

Type of improvement:
Support for Gametrix Jetseat http://www.gametrix.ru/products/14
Explanation of proposals:
This Force Feedback device adds effects for ground handling (bumps)  and flight (i.e. mainly stall and gun shakes). 
Benefits:
Very immersive enhacement. 

 

1000+


  • 0

il2.jpg

i7-7700K | 2x8GB 3000MHz DDR4 | GTX 1060 3GB | Win 7 64-bit | 32" Samsung S32D850T (2560x1440) | Saitek X52 + Saitek Pro Flight Rudder Pedals | TrackIR 5.4 | Wheel Stand Pro Deluxe V2 for Saitek | planned: Gametrix KW-908 JetSeat - IL-2 BoX SUPPORT WANTED!


#559 CZEforzamike

CZEforzamike
  • Founder
  • Posts: 105
  • Location:Prague, Czech republic

Posted 28 March 2017 - 13:29

Type of Improvement: GRAPHICS - CLOUDS

Explanation of Proposal: all types of clouds in this game are absolutely poor and flat!!! It is possible to do something with them? In IL2 Clifs of Dover are clouds much much better then IL2 BOS/M.
No effect of condensation on cockpit canopy. Nothing... Just some fog :((


  • 0

#560 Knipser

Knipser
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3

Posted 31 March 2017 - 09:42

Type of improvement: Interface

Explanation of proposals: It would be really nice, if you could add the Option to adjust the "On-Screen"- Font Size of the HUD. 

Benefits: I am using a High Resolution Wide Screen Display to play IL2, like many other Players too, i guess. While playing Online the Chat and the Server Based"On Screen"- Infos are really important. The Problem is that the Font Size is quite big, and the Text covers a large part of the Screen. Turning off the HUD is the only option to get rid of the large Scale Text. The Font Size could be five times smaller, and it would still be possible to read the text without any problems. 


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users