Jump to content


Photo

Thread to gather your suggestions


  • Please log in to reply
585 replies to this topic

#81 Stab/ZG26-Ruhland

Stab/ZG26-Ruhland
  • Founder
  • Posts: 71
  • Location:Northern Germany

Posted 23 September 2013 - 18:29

Type of improvement: Multiplayer
Explanation of proposals: Selectable spawn areas

In old Il-2 every squadron leader experienced the problem, that the planes of the squadron will spawn randomly spread around the whole airfield. Before you start with your flight, you have to taxi around for a long time. Identifying the planes of your flight can also be very difficult on crowded airfields. I would suggest that the spawn places at an airfield are divided in spawn areas. When the player chooses his airfield, he has the option to choose the certain spawnarea (area 1, area 2, and so on) by himself. So he is able to spawn in direct company of his squadron mates.

Benefits: This feature would simplify the gameplay and coordination of pilots when playing online without leaving the realm of a serious simulation. And it would be more historical simultaneously since the flights in WW2 started from the same position if possible.


  • 5

"In Aikido, we don´t throw our opponent down to earth. We throw the earth down to our opponent." - Morihei Ueshiba

il2forumsignatur.png


#82 6./ZG26_Emil

6./ZG26_Emil
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3076
  • Location:Northern Monkey

Posted 25 September 2013 - 07:29

Type of improvement: Multiplayer

 

Explanation of proposals: Incorporate chat in to the server listing.

 

The online success of IL2 in my opinion was due to the third party software called Hyperlobby. The software enabled users to see other players before they entered a game and chat with them. This made finding people to fly against much easier as not everyone wants to join a dogfight server. It enabled online wars, coops and team versus team fights to thrive. It should therefore be a priority to make it possible to communicate with people who are online but NOT yet in a server. There is more than enough room for both a server list and chat lobby on the multiplayer screen in game. The lack of a chat (and therefore the ability to find opponents or different mission types) is why many people are still playing the antiquated IL2. I believe that when BOS is released there will be a surge of people playing but this will eventually drop off when people discover there is only dogfight type missions to fly. There are still more people playing Il2 through hyperlobby than most other simulators.

 

Benefits: Boost the number of online players, and make it easy to find oponents, encourage different mission types.


  • 5

#83 Dakpilot

Dakpilot
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3864
  • Location:Afrika

Posted 25 September 2013 - 08:45

Type of improvement: Some sort of benchmarking track or feature

 

 

Explanation of proposals:  In original IL-2 there was the "Black Death " track that was used as a benchmark to see how computer performance related to FPS, depending on graphic settings or hardware, while not perfect it enabled an instant comparison between 2 persons setups with a constant. As far as I know this is not possible or as easily repeatable in ROF, 

My proposal is some form of track or mission that can be flown on autopilot that is consistently repeatable, and is reasonably taxing on system recources to give an apples versus apples benchmark so you can see FPS changes with various computer systems and graphic settings. In IL-2 this allowed me to test options and hardware, and not spend hours chasing settings/hardware settup that had little or no real world effect

 

Benefits: An easy and simple to use method of graphic and hardware optimization that is the same for every user. Time saving, to see if changes you have made are real or perceived  and all on a level playing field. Also a real world benchmark to show people what is achievable and to help get the best experience/performance from their system/game. This could also help with bugs/troubleshooting in the Beta phase of developement

 

Cheers Dakpilot


  • 4

i5 3570K at 4,46Ghz//H100i//P8Z77-I-DELUXE//16GB 1600mhz ram//Galax GTX970 4GB EXOC//Samsung Evo840 128gbSSD x2//LG 49" 3840 X 2160//MSFFB2// Saitek throttle quadrant//Win10-64bit


#84 Crow

Crow
  • Founder
  • Posts: 164
  • Location:Texas, USA

Posted 25 September 2013 - 20:30

Type of improvement: Graphics

 

Explanation of proposals: When the FOV is reduced to the point that an aircraft that should be visible disappears, draw a single pixel or some other representation there instead.

 

Benefits: For the people that do not want to use icons, but also don't have three screens to run a triple monitor setup, this allows them to keep the zoom level out so they can scan more of the sky without missing contacts because they've disappeared due to the zoom level. Without this, people who have a triple monitor setup have a significant advantage because they can run their FOV very zoomed in which makes planes visible from a a much further distance.


  • 2

"Oh! I have slipped the surly bonds of Earth

And danced the skies on laughter-silvered wings;"


#85 Crow

Crow
  • Founder
  • Posts: 164
  • Location:Texas, USA

Posted 25 September 2013 - 20:40

Type of improvement: Camera

 

Explanation of proposals: Do not restrict head movement (Yaw, Pitch, Roll axes). If someone wants to look at the back of their chair or their feet, let them. Allow players to move the camera as close to the edges of the cockpit as possible (X, Y, Z axes). Allow players to remove all inertia, G-effects, smoothing for the camera in the camera options (not the difficulty menu). The goal is to have movement that is fluid and precise, without intangible game restrictions interfering. TrackIR already offers all of these features and is extremely customizable to fit exactly what the user wants. There is  no reason for its inputs to then be filtered a second time in game if the player doesn't want them to.

 

Benefits: It is very unintuitive to have your view suddenly stopped. You don't know when the view will start moving again, so you tend to overshoot where you intend to look. Additionally, some of the camera restrictions in RoF are dependent on the height or depth of your view. This is very unintuitive because you aren't actually sitting in the cockpit and you can't see the real dimensions of it. You have no way of knowing whether or not your head movement should be restricted or not from your current position. The restrictions don't offer any benefit in realism (you still won't be able to look through the aircraft's structure or anything) so they are just frustrating to someone who is trying to get the camera to cooperate.


  • 6

"Oh! I have slipped the surly bonds of Earth

And danced the skies on laughter-silvered wings;"


#86 Skikartuzy

Skikartuzy
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1

Posted 26 September 2013 - 13:09

Type of improvement:  Dynamic Campaigns for single player

 

Explanation of proposals: Campaigns that are different everytime you play it. Even if the dynamic campaign is the same level of detail/interaction as in IL2 1946, where you can choose what squadron, plane and time you start. The campaign is effected by your input in your last sortie and randomises such things as weather. At the most ambitious level it would be ace to have a real time dynamic campaign such as there was in Falcon 4 but I could easily believe if that would be asking too much.

 

Benefits: A game that has massive replay value, where everytime you play a campaign it will always be different. Unlike a static campaign where it would get stale.

 

Note: You could still keep it realitively historically accurate by having major points still pinned in a dynamic campaign. Though some of players previous sorties could slightly effect the number of units on each side, for example.

 

For me a dynamic campaign is a deal breaker for this game. It will give it massive replay value and keep it fresh. This is what, has kept me playing the previous games all these years.


  • 5

#87 9./JG54_Stray

9./JG54_Stray
  • Member
  • Posts: 173
  • Location:The cockpit

Posted 09 October 2013 - 09:34

Type of improvement: gameplay

Explanation of improvement: in IL2 series a key set to "exiting" aircraft is missing. When a pilot lands his aircrat he cannot exit it - he can only bail out ( lol ) or sit in the cockpit and be strafed by enemy. Exiting the aircraft would help pilots keep the full mission score and watch teammates fly their mission, without exiting mission itself.

Benefits: already explained.

 

Thank you.


  • 7
  
I want my money back. This is not what was promised in pre-order. Stick to your declarations..EDIT: got my cash back. You keep clapping clap clap clap... Welcome to CloD2, double the failure of the first one.
 
 
 

#88 JG333_Kreuz

JG333_Kreuz
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1
  • Location:Deutschland

Posted 09 October 2013 - 20:43

Gameplay: Rolle of Reconnaissance and Remote Reconnaissance, Bomber /Fighter plane with Camera-> detected by Reconnaissance Target Enemy Association , Factory etc.good Homerun-> Create Bonus System: Detected Target as .. 2 Fighter Planes more etc.

Graphics: Lanes of Tanks and Infantry in the Field and Road -> search by notified Bodies moving Enemy on the Ground,

 

Graphics: Emphasize the degree of Destruction of busy Roads, Roadsides destroyed Nature

 

Miscellaneous :Gunncam in orginal Wingplace, Videostyl 1.Normal or 2.Old Black/Wite

 

Full Missions Editor: Flakbatterie marching order, provide Flakbatterieplaceplan as modules in the editor disposal

 

8.8trossseahq.jpg

 

Thank you


Edited by JG333_Kreuz, 09 October 2013 - 20:44.

  • 1

#89 [MA]_Goblin

[MA]_Goblin
  • Founder
  • Posts: 459
  • Location:Sweden/Rödeby

Posted 11 October 2013 - 10:15

Type of improvement (suggestion): Controls/Interface

 

Explanation of suggestion: Mke it possible to export data from the instruments to external resources

 

Benefits: Will make it possible for those wanting to to build a cockpit or to use secondary monitor to show
gauges during flight. Together with the possibility to map controls to buttons this will enhance immersion for 
people who would like to go this far in the simulation.


  • 3

Spoiler

#90 St/JG3Schaefer40

St/JG3Schaefer40
  • Founder
  • Posts: 58

Posted 12 October 2013 - 09:29


Type of improvement: AI (gunners)

Explanation of proposals: It would be good if the gunners of a bomber formation do not begin to fire simultaneously, but slightly offset in time. Otherwise, one is reminded of a shower head and not to individual soldiers with their own perception (Perspective, view, depth perception, tactics, fear).

Benefits: Easy(?) to implement (random generator?) and great effect for a more realistic feeling when attacking bombers.
  • 2

#91 SYN_Vander

SYN_Vander
  • Tester
  • Posts: 271
  • Location:Netherlands

Posted 19 October 2013 - 09:45

 

Type of improvement: Gameplay/ Multiplayer

 

Explanation of proposal: The ability to take the slot of an AI aircraft while a mission is already running.

 

This can be:

1) During an offline, single mission (single, career or campaign), you have the option to change planes by "spawning" in an existing AI plane. This is also possible if you get shot down so you can continue your mission in another plane. The availability of the option depends on the difficulty level you are playing.

 

2) During a multiplayer co-op mission a player can join the mission when it is already running and spawn in an existing AI plane. A player logs in, checks the multiplayer list with (co-op) games and picks an interesting scenario. He reads the mission brief, checks how long the mission has been running, chooses a plane and drops right in the mission. If the player leaves the mission before it has ended, the AI will take over again (optional feature). During the mission, the number of real players may vary, but there is always a chance you meet a real player. Players that finish/get shot down can do the same (depending on difficulty level). An extra feature would be to be able to be gunner of an AI plane.

Other necessary features: a) Multiplayer game list shows how long a mission has been running, b) plane slot shows status (on ground/in air/inactive)

 

Note that this relates to the improvement request by gavagai, which sort of a combination of 1) and 2).

 

Benefits: 

 

1) This will increase replay value of missions by a huge amount, because you can try out the same mission in different planes, plus you can continue a mission after a mishap (think flak!). It may be possible to introduce unreliability with this feature so a plane in a flight might encounter a problem and have to turn home. If this happens to the player he can change planes. I always liked this feature in older sims.

 

2) This is the holy grail of realistic multi player and multiplayer campaigns. There is no need to have people to meet up exactly at the same time to start a scenario. Players can choose how much time they will spend on a mission. Realistic mission scenarios with long duration can be played , but the player does not necessarily have to be there from beginning to end. Players could even opt to take over each others planes.

Popular missions may have a full house, while others will have only one player, but there will be many more (interesting) multiplayer games to choose from than the now common dogfight servers.

For new players, multiplayer will be more accessible.

 

 

Since I can't edit my post, I just quote my own post. This is to support the above feature request.

 

In this latest development video of Star Citizen the team discusses the sqn 42 campaign. They announce that it will be possible for friends to drop in during a game and fly the missions as a co-op. I think this is pretty cool and is something I would REALLY like to have for RoF and BoS.
 

  • 1

#92 SpiritOFlight

SpiritOFlight
  • Founder
  • Posts: 239
  • Location:Germany

Posted 23 October 2013 - 22:17

Thanks BlackSix for pointing to this thread. As you wished, the linking (dublicate) of the recommendations:

 

1) Telemetry Data in Tracks: http://forum.il2stur...ry-data-tracks/

 

2) Controller Input-Output Module before Flightmodel Module: http://forum.il2stur...curves/?p=40552 (follow my posts)

 

 

 

PS: As far as for point 2) - i don´t know how you guys solved/implemented it in BoS yet. So, if it is already done in this or similar fashion, skip 2)   ;)


  • 0

"... Dominance dissolves into attitude. Superiority reveals intentions. Self-confident commitment is bondage. Truly, a moment of truth. However, it is "Spirit" the choreograph of life and death. Majesty becomes weakness. Vulnerability becomes strength ..."
 


#93 SpiritOFlight

SpiritOFlight
  • Founder
  • Posts: 239
  • Location:Germany

Posted 03 November 2013 - 09:26

Type of improvement:

 

Memory based Anti-cheat protection and validation.

 

 

Explanation of proposals:

 

Conventional anti-cheat programs and measurements were mostly based on file comparisions methods (crt=2 i.e) in order to validate the legitimacy of the install in multiplayer.

 

I do NOT intend to post an "how to cheat" instruction here, but in order to solve a problem one has to recognize the problem first, therfore i am forced to elaborate!

That being said, we are talking about Memory Hacking Tools and apps which are available on the net in many different variations and forms.

 

What does such a tool do and how it is used to "cheat"?:

 

Simple, such a program can access your memory once your game as host or client is loaded and can find specific values and change them without the other side (multiplayer host or client) ever having a chance to "know it", and conventional file comparision methods will not detect this either.

 

What can be manipulated?

 

1) First of all the flight-model defintion files loaded into the memory ... such as "set aircraft weight to 0kg", "thrust" etc etc

 

2)Or simply the game-settings can be overwritten - in example within IL-2:

 

- Engine Overheat

- Torque and Gyro Effects

- Flutter Effects

- Stalls and Spins

- Realistic Gunnery

- Cockpit Always On

- etc etc etc

 

...list is longer

 

You may have already realized the potential threat given here. I hope you do, because as i said, things will only be addressed, if things are recognized FIRST! ONLY THEN pilots and producers will understand the danger of this and try to fix it.

 

How can it be fixed?

 

Simple...

 

One can integrate Algorithms into the code, which validate Game-Settings, Flight Model defintions, actually everything what could be "misused" on a memory level instead of in file level.

This is not easy to do as flight sims generate a TONS of data in the memory and it is very hard to locate what value is responsible for what ingame in the first place, but even for that problematic there are already many "memory convert and search" tools available making cheaters life much much easier. Once found, those values can be always manipulated with just a 3rd party on the desktop running memory hack tool.

 

For me (to be honest) it was not suprising AT ALL to see a 19 year old teenager, who started flying IL-2 six month ago, defeating everyone in one of the last famous competition leagues (including old respected aces like the =FB=, SLI, 154th etc..) and winning the tournament. But this post of mine here does not serve the purpose of cheater accusations and it is not allowed by the forum rules either. The topic is memory based protection from manipulations (such as in future versions of BMS ie.)

 

The problem is, that very often people understand or at least "smell", that there is something not right, but the problem is to PROOVE it without telemetry data available in the tracks (missing) also posted here: http://forum.il2stur...ry-data-tracks/ .. and the fear to be ridiculed if one raises suspicion publically. All that is left is being forced to be riddled and watch "dumb-struck" (given one has the ability to recognize faults anyways).

 

Benefits:

 

 

Benefits are clear:

 

- Better anti-cheat protection !

 

- Gurantee fair play on all levels !

 

- More trust into the product and the producer itself !

 

- More trust within competitions and tournaments !

 

- Higher chances to find sponsors for competitions as this seemed to be a problem in the past !

 

- Better reputation for the sim producer as such (responsibility shown regards) !

 

- Populartiy increase

 

- maybe much more benefits...feel free to share.

 

 

 

 

Respectfully

 

A.S


Edited by A-S, 03 November 2013 - 09:34.

  • 3

"... Dominance dissolves into attitude. Superiority reveals intentions. Self-confident commitment is bondage. Truly, a moment of truth. However, it is "Spirit" the choreograph of life and death. Majesty becomes weakness. Vulnerability becomes strength ..."
 


#94 West

West
  • Founder
  • Posts: 389
  • Location:Gent - België

Posted 07 November 2013 - 19:00

Seems like OR opens possibilities for bailing (or maybe for not bailing any longer :))...
 
Speaking of hitting the silk, we will have 2 seaters and bombers: shouldn't they be able to bail to? :huh:
 
Will shooting down bailed crew add points, better not if I may suggest ...

  • 0

#95 59th_Mechanist

59th_Mechanist
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3

Posted 12 November 2013 - 16:40

Type of improvement: Gameplay
 
Explanation of proposal:
Group based infantry with garrison ability. Nowadays there is a common interpretation of infantry combat in non-shooter games to have them as a group, like Wargame:EE / AB; World in Conflict, Company of Heroes, and the list goes one. I know that the games I mentioned, have infantry as a significant game element and not just a target to shoot at, but this flight sim can really benefit such gameplay element. Stalingrad was one of the most intense and brutal urban combat in the history of mankind, and leaving out infantry would be a huge immersion killer, not to mention the huge degradation of ground attack airplanes such as IL-2s and Ju-87s in their list of targets. Group coordinated infantry is an excellent combination of performance and gameplay value, it have proven it self successful for years now, basic implementation would satisfy most of the needs.
 
Group infantry should have the following action:
- Move / Advance
- Hide (hit the ground and/or seek cover)
- Garrison building block, not individual buildings but blocks to keep the resource usage low. For example 4 simple houses can be a block, or two apartments and such (Wargame: AB have this and works awesome). Visualisation should be only muzzle flashes from windows.
- Garrison trenches and treelines, sohuld be pretty the same but with visualisation (can be static).
 
- Transportable if possible, that would be hard to do on the AI side.
 
Benefits: None of the current flightsims have worthy infantry in them and leaving out form a WWII sim especially based on Stalingrad would make the whole map dead and static.

  • 0

#96 thx1138

thx1138
  • Founder
  • Posts: 250
  • Location:Charlottesville VA USA

Posted 12 November 2013 - 16:42

Gameplay stats.

 

 

Improvement;

 

Reset any and all existing leaderboards upon final release in the spring.

 

Benefits;

 

Allow new game purchasers to be able to start on the leaderboards on an equal footing as founders.


Edited by thx1138, 12 November 2013 - 16:44.

  • 0

Arm In Arm The Angels Fly, Keep Me From Falling Out The Sky


#97 Sokol1

Sokol1
  • Founder
  • Posts: 4112
  • Location:"Internet"

Posted 12 November 2013 - 17:20

"Take any plane at any moment".

 

If this "gamey" option are available, make impossible abandon a plane in flight and take another, like is possible do in il-2:CloD multiplayer.

Serves on only as "modern" version of the "pull the cable" used by unfair players since Air Warrior/Warbirds online.

Player can only leave aircraft if landing, bail out or dead inside then. :)

 

Sokol1


Edited by Sokol1, 12 November 2013 - 17:25.

  • 2

... guns were too quiet when engine is running and speed is high, and there was no "immersion of fire and metal storm in 2 meters aside of me"


#98 csThor

csThor
  • Founder
  • Posts: 593
  • Location:Germany

Posted 15 November 2013 - 19:24

Type of improvement: GUI (with gameplay relevance)

 

Explanation of improvement: As Albert explained in the livestream today currently there is one global control setup. However not every plane has or needs every control. To give an example: In a Ju 87 Stuka or Pe-2 there is an obvious need for dive-break controls which other aircraft don't have and need. The same is true for a number of engine-specific controls (e.g. a Ju 87 has different control needs than a Bf 1009). To reduce the number of key bindings a player needs to remember it would be very helpful (especially given the large amount of possible commands as seen in the livestream) to have either plane-specific or simply multiple control setups a player can save, load and modify at his leisure.

 

Benefits: Reduced number of key combos reduces workload for the player, less chance of keys assigned multiple (potentially counterproductive) functions. It's essentially a tool of convenience for the player and a help for players who are new and not experienced.


  • 2

image.jpg


#99 9./JG52Lopp

9./JG52Lopp
  • Founder
  • Posts: 10
  • Location:Indiana

Posted 16 November 2013 - 05:29

Type of improvement: Control input response setting

 

Explanation of improvement: In today's live stream (41) it looked to me like the control input response setting gui was same as CloD which is not good. RoF has the best input response setups in any sim I've ever played. Why not use it?

 

Benefits: Gives the player way more options than this simple sensitivity and deadzone setting and RoF also allows for each plane to have its own axis settings. I really hope you can work this in!


  • 1

#100 I/JG27_Rollo

I/JG27_Rollo
  • Founder
  • Posts: 536

Posted 16 November 2013 - 12:27

Type of improvement: AI

Explanation of proposals: Have AI flight leaders avoid clouds instead of flying right through them.

I just played a campaign mission in RoFl and once again my flight leader thought it would be a good idea to lead all 5 Albatros through a single thick cloud instead of going around it. With zero visibility within the cloud, all one can do is either to break the formation and then look for the others once out of the cloud or to try and keep flying straight and level while hoping not to crash into the flight leader or the wingman.

The second part is especially difficult without proper flight instruments and while this might not be so much of a problem with WWII cockpits, it might still be worthwhile to teach AI flight leaders to fly around those clouds.

 

(This is of course something to maybe think about later when all the important stuff has been addressed.)

Benefits: Fewer dangerous situations when following an AI flight leader.


  • 0
Fhj.-Fw. Rollo, Einsatzoffizier - Weiße 5
Posted Image
Posted Image

#101 LF_ManuV

LF_ManuV
  • Founder
  • Posts: 602
  • Location:Europe

Posted 16 November 2013 - 16:23

Type of improvement: Graphics

Explanation of proposals: Changing Lens Flare Effect

Benefits: The actual lens Flare does not mix (IMHO)  with the new graphics, something new, more realistic would benefict the actual look of the Sim


Edited by .-RDS-.Manu_vc, 16 November 2013 - 16:24.

  • 0

Thanks PA-Sniv, a very good person on this community 


#102 JtD

JtD
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2596

Posted 19 November 2013 - 17:14

Type of improvement: Control
Explanation of proposals: Make any key combination available for controls, to allow for simpler keyboard commands. For instance, using + and - as general plus/minus key, you could use them r+ and r- to open and close radiator, c+ and c- to control oil cooler, s+ and s- to control supercharger, m+ and m- to control mixture, p+ and p- for prop pitch control and so on. Currently combining keys seems to be limited to ctrl and shift, which is somewhat limiting. Ideally this could include keys+mouse or key+joystick axis.
Benefits: More option for individual optimized set up.


  • 3

Facts are the best defence against the experts.


#103 No601_Swallow

No601_Swallow
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1012
  • Location:Oh Vienna...

Posted 20 November 2013 - 15:59

Type of improvement: Control
Explanation of proposals: Allow more controls to be mapped to axes.
Benefits:  Some of the controls are activated by holding down a key (for example, flaps). If these (and others, such as gear) can also be mappable to axes for sliders and levers, then those with throttle quadrants or home cockpits can make more use of them. 


  • 0

#104 JG5_Schuck

JG5_Schuck
  • Founder
  • Posts: 231
  • Location:Bomber County

Posted 20 November 2013 - 23:59

Type of improvement: Gameplay/Piloting skill

 

Explanation of proposals: The ability to disable (check box, Realism settings.) pilot head zoom and in game HUD (really, a HUD in a 1940's aircraft? Its almost a cheat!) For multiplay/servers.

If you need to know the engine temp, look at the gauge! Same with throttle position, flaps, gear, supercharger, mixture etc etc etc.

But obviously not the map!

 

Benefits: Better immersion/realism. Better pilot awareness of his aircraft and controls = better pilot.


  • 0

#105 Fliegenpilz

Fliegenpilz
  • Founder
  • Posts: 19

Posted 22 November 2013 - 01:00

Type of improvement: Sound (while gliding)

 

Explanation of proposals: If engine is shut down and the plane glides, I suggest to slightly increase the sound of airflow surrounding the aircraft. Especially while the canopy is closed I personally think it is far too quiet inside the cockpit.

When the canopy is being opened it gets fine, sounds for spinning are awesome too! (Please note that there still should be a difference between opened and closed canopy, just not as big as now.)

 

Benefits: Will help keep up the stunning sensation of flying this sim already delivers in a rather uncommon situation. This might become important when the players plane was shot and he has to do an emergency landing with jammed motor (thus no engine sounds).

 

Tested and found by shutting down engine in midflight in alpha build.

Reference: My own experiences as a glider pilot in RL.

 

Keep up the fantastic work!  :salute:


Edited by Fliegenpilz, 22 November 2013 - 01:06.

  • 0

#106 4H_V-man

4H_V-man
  • Founder
  • Posts: 49
  • Location:Texas

Posted 22 November 2013 - 05:53

Type of Improvement: Gameplay

 

Explanation of Proposal: Reward pilots for recon missions. The original use of aircraft by militaries was recon. Fighters were developed as a response. Currently in RoF, recon is an objective, but no points are given. To those to whom points matter, there is no incentive for them to do recon missions.

 

Benefits: Improved incentive to take the less 'glamorous' aircraft and occomplish historic objectives.


  • 0

#107 Sparrer

Sparrer
  • Founder
  • Posts: 201

Posted 22 November 2013 - 11:58

Type of Improvement: Damage Model

 

Explanation of proposals: Random Failures

Set random failure linked to a probality setup(0% to 100%) choosed by the player or mission. It could be in a online or offline flight. It could be increased with the evolution of a campaing simulating the aircraft stress. Like Early war : 1%. Late war: 3%

Ex: Failure Probability : 2%.   There are a 2% chance of a  pre modeled failure/malfunction occours during any time(also random) of the flight.

It could be any pre-modeled failure or malfunction: Engine, Oil Pressure, Hydraulics controls, comunications, Gear, Flaps, Radiator, guns, bombs, gunsigth, leaks, fuel pumps, prop pitch, etc

And they also might  be followed or not by a visual/sound effects. : Ex: Engine Failure: bursts sounds ; Gunsight Failure: Gunsigth blinks

Benefits: In an aircraft there are several gauges. But the virtual player NEVER check them because he knows the aircraft will be every time ok. 

 

If random failures/malfunctions were modeled and the player knows it....the DOUBT of aircraft health could make him check the oil pressure sometimes as example, like a real one.

 

In adition, the failures may be logged in the debrief to prevent any bug or war damage confusion

I think this is a easy implement with a great consequences in gameplay and il2 series :salute:


  • 2

#108 Fifi

Fifi
  • Founder
  • Posts: 712
  • Location:Nouméa

Posted 25 November 2013 - 22:53

Type of improvement: Controls

Explanation of proposals: Separated controls layers for each BOS plane

Benefits: So we could have multiples profiles for each BOS plane. I.e we don't necessarily need same mapped buttons for 109 as for Lagg!


  • 1

#109 II./ZG15_Falke

II./ZG15_Falke
  • Founder
  • Posts: 123
  • Location:Germany

Posted 26 November 2013 - 13:56

Type of improvement:  5) interface
Explanation of proposals:

 

I must say your interface for controls setup is set up very good, well done!

 

I only miss one feature: if I give input to a certain HID Controller (except mouse) I would like to jump to first, then second usage of the control in the opened list (settings list of a certain settings group of a certain airplane).

 

For example if I move Axis z of controller joystick2 the input dialogue should jump to the first setting in the given list where Axis z of joystick2 is used.

Or if I depress RALT R on my Keyboard I should get the first setting which uses RALT R

 

If there are multiple mappings of an axis or button(combination) or keystroke(combination) I should be able to step through settings mappings of my input by multiple input of the control in question.

 

Benefits: better, easier mapping of controls, less Complicated Input selection, settings


  • 0

:) Shit happens!

 


#110 6BLBird-Dog

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

Posted 29 November 2013 - 03:33

Type of improvement .Controls


Explanation of proposals . Add cannon fire key as the iL2 could carry machine guns ,cannons , rockets and Bombs.

Benefits. For later models that carried multiple weapon loads .
  • 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

#111 lefuneste

lefuneste
  • Founder
  • Posts: 102

Posted 30 November 2013 - 11:23

Type of improvement: Gameplay/ Interface

 

Explanation of proposals: An automated flightlog according to  waypoints of the mission

 

Today it's not easy to have a realistic navigation (without "god view" or "GPS like" position of your plane drawn on the game map). I use to do it for RoF, but I have to make screen copy of the map and then make some angular/distance measurement....Even in St Minhiel Campain we do not have enough information to make a standard navigation.

 

For example: here is what we have in St Minhiel campaign:waypoints.JPG Even if the briefing has far more information than standard missions, it is not sufficient. I have the heading, and distance, but how long will I have to flight along this heading ? When should I arrive at final destination ? How many fuel should I have to make the navigation safety ?

 

Here is an example of what we should have to make a correct navigation The plane is flying toward "Jouaville" waypoint for this example.

 

 

flightplan.JPG

 

You will also find in "explanation.pdf" the things that should be input during navigation to help to cope with delay or unwanted encountering !

 

 

Benefits : To have a realistic “watch and compass” navigation without too much pain (screen capture, map printing, measuring, computation…).

No more use of "god view"/GPS like position of your plane because it's too complicated to make a realistic navigation.

Add the navigation feature as a real gameplay element of the game.

Be able to anticipate better your fuel consumption.

Act like a real pilot...

Attached Files


Edited by lefuneste01, 30 November 2013 - 11:26.

  • 1

#112 lefuneste

lefuneste
  • Founder
  • Posts: 102

Posted 30 November 2013 - 17:21

Type of improvement: Graphics/interface/Gameplay

Explanation of proposals: “smart labels/icons”

The real FOV of a human is near 120°. With a standard computer screen it is no more than 20°.

So we can not see in wide FOV what a real pilot could. We have to zoom/unzoom, that make harder to find ground target when flying, keep a good tactical view, …

Labels can help to cope with that, but they are now far “unrealistic”. The idea is to have “smart labels”, which should be of the main color of the skin of the object, more or less transparent regarding the distance and the status of the object (moving, static, camouflaged,…) and have information that are linked to the distance:

  • very far: nothing
  • far: just a small symbol, describing the type of the object (single engine, multi engine, object with track, object with wheels)
  • near: model of object (ex: Bf109,…)
  • very near : model + number

The distance for the level of information should be function of object type (a bomber should be seen farther than a fighter…)  

Benefits: provide a better tactical view when flying, by avoiding zoom/unzoom to see targets because of the size of the screen, but without compromise with realism


Edited by lefuneste01, 30 November 2013 - 17:22.

  • 0

#113 lefuneste

lefuneste
  • Founder
  • Posts: 102

Posted 30 November 2013 - 17:56

Type of improvement: interface/gameplay

 

Explanation of proposals: “radio information on map”

The idea is to have the possibility to associate radio messages with drawing on game map.

For example, if a ground control send a message describing a flight to intercept, a arrow with information regarding the flight should on drawn on the map where the flight is supposed to be.

Or, if on close support mission, the message and the associated drawing should indicate where a ground target is.

A list of all messages with drawing received should be drawned in a small windows, each message should be activated/desactived to be drawn or not on the map.

The time of the message should also be written on the map, near the drawing.

 

Benefits: Help to have better scripted missions/campaign. This should make the missions more interesting, with surprise elements, but also keep the things to do clear.


Edited by lefuneste01, 30 November 2013 - 17:57.

  • 2

#114 lefuneste

lefuneste
  • Founder
  • Posts: 102

Posted 30 November 2013 - 18:15

Type of improvement: interface/gameplay

Explanation of proposals: “radio navigation information on map”

The idea is to have the possibility to have radio triangulation lines drawn on map. Each line is drawn from the station emitting the Radio Direction Finding signal, with the angle it should have if measured from the plane. Of course with a angular error margin computed form different factor. It there is multiple stations, multiple lines should be drawn. This should help to locate the plane. The lines should be drawn “on demand”, and it should take some time to measure the angle and have multiple lines. They should also be cleared.

Benefits: Help to have easy but realistic navigation.


Edited by lefuneste01, 30 November 2013 - 18:15.

  • 2

#115 -MG-Cacti4-6

-MG-Cacti4-6
  • Founder
  • Posts: 335
  • Location:Florida

Posted 07 December 2013 - 02:59

Type of Improvement: Spotting, realism

 

Explanation of proposals:

 

Add reflections and metal glint to the a/c. spotting becomes very problematic in expert setting at ranges in excess of 1.5km. In all reality, You can feasibly see an aircraft up to 5km away or further do to reflections/sun glint on the air-frame. While that distance may seem problematic here, It should not be overly difficult to spot a plane at ranges of 1.5km to 2.5km. in this current form, the absence of sun glint effects makes spotting overly difficult.

 

Benefits:

 

Improved realism, improved spotting, more immersion.


  • 0

Cacti 4-6, Operations Commander

Militarygamers.com, A community by vets, for vets


#116 Sim

Sim
  • Founder
  • Posts: 668

Posted 07 December 2013 - 10:01

Type of improvement: Sound
 
Explanation of proposals: Add speed of sound simulation
 
Benefits: Realism, immersion..

  • 0

#117 Marcomies

Marcomies
  • Founder
  • Posts: 67
  • Location:Finland

Posted 07 December 2013 - 12:03

Type of improvement: Graphics
 
Explanation of proposals: Adjustable level of detail and/or pre-loading textures option.
 
Benefits: The game has very aggressive LOD and lot of stuff is just bobbing up and the airfields seem especially jagged at distance. The most annoying thing is that plane textures seem to get unloaded even if you are looking the other way for a moment and always if you are jumping between friendly/enemy plane views.The game is already running on max settings for mid-range computers so this optimization is a bit extreme for many.

  • 1

#118 ph1317

ph1317
  • Founder
  • Posts: 57

Posted 07 December 2013 - 23:04

Type of improvement: Controls / View
 
Explanation of proposals: Change external view so that
1) initial camera position is few meters behind player plane.
2) when plane turns camera keeps its position related to plane. So it stays behind the player's plane if that is where I've moved the camera
 
Benefits: easier plane control from external view

  • 2

---

Intel i5-2500K @ 3.3GHz, 8GB RAM, Radeon HD6950 2GB, Windows7 64bit


#119 71st_AH_Mastiff

71st_AH_Mastiff
  • Tester
  • Posts: 3690
  • Location:unknown, Mars maybe...

Posted 08 December 2013 - 02:20

http://forum.il2stur...radio-chat-box/

 

Type of improvement: Make Clutter for HUD more easily defined for individual taste.
 
Explanation of proposals: Change HUD box's view; i.e" H" key for just Radio, and "M" key for just Maps, and "I" key just for Speed bar, and
add a key for the Icons.
Benefits: Make it individual for removing the clutter from the HUD when out side view or in cockpit.

  • 3

"any failure you meet is never a defeat; merely a set up for a greater comeback"


#120 driftaholic

driftaholic
  • Founder
  • Posts: 612
  • Location:Tucson, Arizona

Posted 08 December 2013 - 02:50

Type of improvement: Graphics LOD
 
Explanation of proposals:  Increase the option to render ground at a higher level of detail then currently maxed at. I see a lot of patches in the ground coming in and out of "focus"  when circling at 3K elev looking for targets. 
 
Benefits: Easier on your eyeballs. 

  • 0

Selling G940 cheap. PM me  :salute:





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users