Thread to gather your suggestions

[Dirtbag_Jim]

1. Type of improvement: Fairness/Historical accuracy

Explanation of proposals: Improved La-5F canopy with cut down rear fuselage

Benefits: From various sources online, all La-5's equipped with the M-82F engine were made with the improved glass canopy with improved rearward visibility, and even some equipped with the older M-82 engine were produced to such standards. This should be available in-game as a modification for the La-5, much like how the Fw-190D-9 has the option to install a bubble-top canopy. It would be historical and accurate to have this modification available for the La-5, and it would help improve the fairness of the game: basically all Bf-109's have the option to improve visibility through various modifications (whether through removal of the rear armor plate, or addition of a glass armor plate), while almost all Soviet fighters have abysmal rearward visibility. Having the option for the improved glass canopy would a massively useful addition to the La-5, improving fairness against Luftwaffe fighters, and would be historically accurate. It also just doesn't feel right flying a supposedly "La-5F" in Mid-Late war scenarios (1943+) while still using the terrible canopy from 1942, despite the improved canopy having had widespread introduction early in 1943. The La-5 is a collectors plane as well, so there should be no reason it can't have the same effort of adding a different canopy, as was done for the Fw-190D-9, done for it as well.

 

 

2. Type of improvement: Fairness/Historical accuracy

Explanation of proposals: Glass canopy for Yak-1

Benefits: Many Yak-1's featured a rear glass canopy like on the Yak-7 (and pictured on the Yak-1 illustration below). Having this available as a modification for the Yak-1 in-game would be historically accurate and help improve fairness in the game against Luftwaffe fighters. All Bf-109's have the option to remove rear headrest armor, or install glass armor plates, while all early Soviet fighters (Stalingrad and earlier) save for the Mig-3, have abysmal rearward visibility that can only be negated through massive speed loss by opening the canopy. It creates a massively unfair advantage for Luftwaffe fighters, especially in online environments where situational awareness is paramount to success. It would be historically accurate to introduce a modification to simply change the material of the rear canopy on the Yak-1 from metal to glass, and is clearly feasibly to implement in-game as shown by the Bubble-top canopy modification on the Fw-190D-9, and this would also help make the game more balanced/fair.

 

 

3. Type of improvement: Additional game content

Explanation of proposals: M-105P engine modification for Yak-1, Yak-7 and Lagg-3

Benefits: Having an air frame be able to fit different engine's is clearly doable in-game, as shown by the engine modifications for the Spitfire's (both Mk Vb and Mk IXe). That same type of modification should be available for the Yak-1, Yak-7 and the Lagg-3, where you can equip the earlier M-105P engine instead of the improved M-105PF engine. This would be historically accurate, and an easy way to add a ton more content to the early-mid war scenarios in-game, without having to create a bunch of new planes from scratch, essentially turning 3 planes to 6 variants. This would allow the planes to be used in earlier scenarios, such as using the Yak-7 as an early Yak-7 variants in the Battle of Stalingrad scenarios and campaigns. This ability to expand the plane set of the soviet fighters would also help introduce more variety and diversity to soviet plane selection, rather than having basically 3 extremely similarly performing (almost identical) Yak's (due to them all having the same engine). For online scenarios, and offline campaigns, this would massively improve plane-set selections available for Soviet forces. On a side note, using the earlier M-105P engine should help improve overheating problems on the Yak-1, which was not designed for the M-105PF and thus has insufficient radiators for it. Managing overheating better, despite performance decrease, could help buff the Yak-1 and allow it to stay in a fight for longer, giving it at least a minor advantage/tool to help fight against superior Luftwaffe fighters that outclass it.

Edited April 3, 2020 by Dirtbag_Jim
Adding content, improving formatting

[Oyster_KAI]

Type of improvement:    Insufficient polygons  

Explanation of proposals:  see pics, I-16, 190A3, 190A5, P-47D-28, maybe more.
Benefits:  better gaming immersion, appropriate graphic quality.we dont need to save performance by these little things.

[daliborsky]

Type of improvement:  possibility of creating own ammo belts

Explanation of proposals: it would be nice to make own ammo belt, for instance selecting AP for AG missions, how many of them have phosphorus layer at the back of the bullet (marking bullets) etc...
Benefits: proper ammo for mission

[ACG_La_Crepe]

  Hello,

 

Type of improvement: gameplay

Explanation of proposals: default skins with custom numbers/unit badges

Benefits: As other players don't see custom skins, helps with immersion allowing players on public server to get individual personalized skins. It helps to fly as units. The option exists on IL2 1946 and on Cliffs of Dover where it is appreciated. Option should include number/letters customization, colour of caracters, and possibly unit badges as on these sims. It doesn t cost much in performance/coding and I think greatly enhances multiplayer experience.

 

Thanks.

[Blackhawk_FR]

Type of improvement:  Message in technochat when gun is reloading and reloaded.

Explanation of proposals: Well... having a message in technochat that says when the gun is reloading and when it's reloaded.
Benefits: I realised in 110 we have nothing except a tiny sound. Moreover (with BK37 and I think with MgFF on E2 too), after hitting the reload key, the reload randomly doesn't occur. Those message would help the pilot to confirm if the reload process started. 

[[DBS]TH0R]

Type of improvement:  Normal head movement when operating a gunner station in any of the bombers (SHIFT+T).

Explanation of proposals: Removal of the laggy view control when leaned to the gun in any of the gunner stations (SHIFT+T).
Benefits: Same view control as when not leaned to the gunsight. Not sure why moving your head closer to the gunsight would limit / slow down the head movement in the first place.

[LLv34_Flanker]

Type of improvement: Correct engine to 110E-2

 

Explanation of proposal: Currently in game 110E-2 is using engine DB601A-1, designated DB601B for 110. This engine was used only on E-0/1 early series. Engine used in production E-2 was the DB601N with different reduction gear, designated DB601P. Reduction gear had ratio of 1:1,88 instead of 1:1,55 used in DB601N.

 

Benefits: Finally the proper engine for 110E-2 and a bit more performance. 

Edited April 16, 2020 by LLv34_Flanker

[Grajo]

Type of improvement: Graphics/Gameplay 

 

Explanation of proposals: Fuel/Oil/Coolant Leaks from other Aircraft create a similar effect as Canopy "drops" effect

 

Benefits: My proposal is to extend the idea to any liquid that contacts to that surface. Many time we follow the six of a plane leaking fuel or other fluids into our faces. Would add a lot of "realism" if this is noticeable also when leaks of any kind from other planes contact the surface of our cockpit glass.

 

I understand that his could mean a lot of work from the Devs. (slightly different effects depending of the type of leak) But also will had a lot to the experience, and also another thing to be aware of inside any fight.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Type of improvement: Interface/Multiplayer

 

Explanation of proposals: Chance to mark and filter favorites servers in the multiplayer server menu pages.

 

Benefits: Best management of your "goto" servers and better usability.

Edited April 16, 2020 by HR_Grajo

[Theodore_Morgan]

Type of improvement: Improve Explosion Effects

 

Explanation of proposals: I don´t feel the actual bomb effects have the required realism.

 

Benefits: Since the pleasure of "blowing things up" is one of the most important part of war simulation, this feature should receive more attention and continuous development.

Some older version made by modders is having better Fxs.

[AKA_Relent]

 

Type of improvement:

Relates to Tank Crew.  Please update (I.e. meaning “remove”) the AI units’ (e.g. tanks, artillery, AAA/flak guns, etc.) ability to see through and shoot through vegetation such as swaths of trees in a forest.

Explanation of proposals:

For large numbers of trees bunched together, if these could be treated like a large building structure from the AI perspective, they would likely not be able to see through them and subsequently fire through them.

Benefits:

The benefits include more realistic game play - right now it’s not realistic at all, as any time you as a human player get near enemy units that are on the other side of a block of trees, they fire at you and hit you, and you have no way of knowing exactly where they are, thus your return fire is often blind.  It is really hurting game play, and likely affecting sales as a lot of people may be hesitant to purchase with this AI flaw.  Please see this thread for more comments:  
 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/56719-ai-sees-through-vegetation/

 

 

Thanks for your consideration.

 

AKA_Relent

Edited April 18, 2020 by AKA_Relent

[LukeFF]

Category: Gameplay

 

Description: German planes should have a separate radio frequency for radio direction finding. For instance, from the Bf 109 G-6 and the Fw 190 A-5, there is a switch in the cockpit that the pilot had to switch to in order to receive radio bearing and range info and then switch again to receive audio transmissions from wingmen.

 

 

Edited April 19, 2020 by LukeFF

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Type of improvement: Graphics

Explanation of proposals: Fileds and forests on the Arras map has to much alike green color pallete, becouse of that all ground futures blend into ich other. I think making green fields textures more light or forest much more darker would be beneficial to the game map. 
 
Benefits: more real like view of landscape, better navigation. nicer looking to human eye vegetation on the map

 

addiotnal adds:

FC HDR off 12:00 ,preset Ultra, gamma 0.8

 

Real life - In real life you can see how forests/ trees are more darker.

 

 

 

ROF HDR off 12:00 ,settings max out

 

Edited April 19, 2020 by 1PL-Husar-1Esk

[LukeFF]

Category: Gameplay

 

Description: include the callsign of the player's flight in career mode mission briefings, as well as the callsign of the flight being escorted or the escorts, where relevant.

[J2_Bidu]

Type of improvement:

Control 

 

Explanation of proposals:
Provide an optional, small-sized and discretely placed visual representation of force feedback information, for non-force feedback joystick users. I imagine a feature similar to "easy" engine controls and compass, which would provide some reasonable visual equivalent of force feedback; like direction arrow and color gradient intensity. Anything would be better than nothing, so I will leave my definition of "reasonable" to you.

 

Benefits:

Allowing a player with no force feedback equipment to have a better clue of how he's handling the plane.

[LLv34_Flanker]

S! 

 

Type of improvenent: Reduced radio chatter via channels

 

Explanation of proposal: At the moment you hear tankers calling out targets, damage and what not thru the radio regardless of range. In reality tanks used different frequencies than planes thus there was a need of so called command tanks/APCs or similar with multiple radio sets, making communication and coordination possible. 

 

It is quite distracting to hear your crew(multicrew planes), wingmen and tanks telling their stuff at the same time. Cacophony of voices at worst. 

 

This could be cured if tanks and planes had separate channels/frequencies on their radios as in reality. As there is no direct cooperation between AI tanks and the player, their messages are not needed. If this changed with Air Marshall or similar, then a selectable channel would do the job just fine, simulating a command vehicle. 

 

Benefits: Less noise and chatter when it is not needed. Realistic operations if cooperation between ground forces and planes is implemented though using proper channels/frequencies. 

[FTC_Knipser]

Type of improvement: Multiplayer Gameplay

 

Explanation of proposal: After joining a Multiplayer-Server, players have to choose a side first, before beeing allowed to see any Map or Briefing details (see attached image).In the current verision of the game, you have to choose a plane first before beeing assigned to a certain team. After that has happened you get a time penalty when switching sides. But the penalty does not apply, if you haven't picked a plane already. So it is a common practice to click on an airfield of the opposing side first, to get some intel about your enemies, like how many players did spawn on a certain airfield or to look for hidden objectives, e.g. Paratrooper dropzones on Tactical Air War. Getting this kind of intel about the opposing team gives you an unfair advantage.

 

Benefits: With little effort, you get a lot more fairplay in multiplayer matches.
 

Edited April 23, 2020 by JG4_Knipser

[Justy89]

Type of improvement: Gameplay - career

Explanation of proposals: Let us create and quickly apply our own preset configurations of payload/fuel/modification/skins (to our own craft as well as the whole squadron)

Benefits: Right now, the player needs to manually change the configuration before every mission. If they're the unit commander and want to apply changes to the whole squadron, they need to edit the configuration of EACH PLANE in the squadron before every mission, which is a rather mind-numbing task. If we could create our own presets, save them under a custom name, such as "ground attack, 60% fuel", "intercept, 40% fuel, gyro" etc.,  and apply them on a per-plane basis, or even to the whole squadron if we wish, all this can be avoided.

Edited May 2, 2020 by Justy89

[squidboi]

Type of improvement: Quality of Life - Binding 

Explanation of proposals: Let us combine two buttons on the HOTAS to a single function

Benefits: Right now, the player only has the option to combing HOTAS button with a keyboard key, not another HOTAS button. This allows you to make combined binds like Left Shift + Button 1, but not the ability to have a "modifier" switch. My pinky switch on my joystick is used as a "modifier" for other simulators. I.E. if I am holding down the pinky switch, it allows me to effectively double the amount of buttons on my joystick by combining it with another button to make a new bind. Currently it is impossible to do this without a software to convert the modifier input to a keyboard input. I currently use Joy2Key to change my modifier button to "shift" key so I can have this desired effect. The benefit to having this behaviour out of the box would mean that users that are used to being able to use a modifier will have expected behaviour without having to search down a solution on the forum using third party software. This feature is already included in your competitors simulators and makes setting up controls a breeze. 

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Type of improvement: Quality of Life - Binding 

Explanation of proposals: Let us have separate sets of bindings for each plane/type of plane. 

Benefits: Right now, the player only has the option to have one "set" of bindings. This creates complication when a user wants to switch to another type of plane that has more axis or different assignments for the buttons. The player is forced to go through the annoying process of creating a new set of bindings for a different plane. The benefit of this would mean players can get accustomed to more airframes with less time spent in the menus and more time spent flying. Once you have your preferred setup for each airframe, it would ideally never need to be edited unless a new hardware solution was found. For instance  users that have a dual throttle, but if  want to use it for 2-engine plane need to rebind each time. (because they use the second lever as a propeller pitch axis on RU&UK&US planes). Your competitor simulators already have this feature and makes for a more enjoyable experience when switching airframes "on the fly". I'm afraid that I fly the 109 almost exclusively because I can't be bothered to rebind my controls every time I want to try something new. 

Edited May 5, 2020 by squidboi

[Soilworker]

Type of improvement: Control.

Explanation of proposals: Separate "Wheel Brakes" control that doesn't affect toe brakes.

Benefits: Allowing people who have toe brakes on their rudder pedals and a brake lever on their joystick to not have the latter affect the former (for nitpicky realism reasons) but more importantly allow us to bind the Me262 front wheel brake to the joystick lever and let us use the front brake without applying the toe brake.

 

Currently I have to use a modifier (shift+lever) to do this.

This should be a pretty simple addition, right?

[INVADER_WARHAWK]

Type of improvement: Damage model

 

Explanation of proposals:  Coming with the new generation damage system 

1)  A new updated fire model, where fire causes skin damage and structual weakening.

 

2)  Cutting fuel suply to an engine on fire to be effective at reducing-extinguishing the fire.

 

Benefits:  more realistic damage model that fits the new generation of damage models coming to IL 2. More realistic gameplay and new challenges ( to return the damaged plane) , Improved immersion, and a chance for twin engine planes( or triple engine) to return to base after one engine is set on fire.

Edited May 15, 2020 by INVADER_WARHAWK

[Zooropa_Fly]

Type of Improvement : GAMEPLAY

 

Proposals : For RRR, to be able to select how much fuel is 're-fuelled' at your pit stop. Either set in the properties box of the re-fuelling object, or be payer selectable at the time of cutting engine.

(If player selectable, the minimum allowed by the sever would have to be adhered to).

 

Benefits : Currently I run a sever with fuel locked at 33% and am introducing RRR into some maps. An amendment addressing the above would mean a player could stop and re-fuel to the mission makers specification. Not many will want to re-fuel to 100% on a dogfight server locked at 33%. Having said that, 2 or 3 flights could be had with that fuel load, but it would be better, in the case of my server, if I could specify re-fuelling to 33%.

 

Cheers,

S!

 

edit : I've just noticed you can stop / re-start fuelling - but it's so quick it can't be controlled. Thanks.

 

 

 

 

Type of Improvement : GAMEPLAY / MP

 

Proposals : To not only be able to lock fuel loads at a single value, but to also have the option to set a 'minimum fuel load'.

 

Benefits : Someone entering a server with, say, fuel locked at 50% - might want to fly with 100% for practice or whatever reason. Any disadvantage is with the player, thus sporting integrity is maintained !

 

Cheers,
S!

Edited May 19, 2020 by Zooropa_Fly

[Guest deleted@210880]

1)

Type of Improvement : Gameplay

 

Proposals : An option to not hear your pilot speak (or read it in the chat).

 

Hearing yourself spot fighters you can't even see, and, saying you are attacking when you are not doing so, is simply painful to parts of the brain. I'd say to just strip all that code out, but maybe someone likes to hear it, so just an option to mute it would be great please.

 

Benefits : Increased immersion, enjoyment and sanity. Reduced teeth grinding.

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

2)

Type of Improvement : Gameplay

 

Proposals : An option to indicate to your AI flight that there is a bandit near/attacking when you are not the leader.

 

A radio call of 'check six' or 'contact spotted', just something to trigger defensive 'behaviour' in the AI. For 'realism' it could be a new hand signal or tied to a flare for VVS. Personally I would be happy to just have the call button for all , and I could just waggle my wings in 'role play' for the VVS at the same time. 

 

Benefits : Increased immersion, enjoyment, sanity and give purpose to flying a campaign. Reduced rage quitting and tears.

 

 

Edited May 25, 2020 by deleted@210880

[=362nd_FS=Andre*]

Type of Improvement: Control

 

Explanation of propsosals: Allow us to choose how quickly we can adjust the gunsight's range without a slider. Right now if you bind two buttons to the "gunsight range adjustment" controls, then by default the gunsight takes about 8 full seconds to change from maximum range to minimum range. This makes it impossible to use your gunsight throughout a dogfight unless you have a HOTAS with an extra slider.

 

Benefits: This will allow players to have more freedom of how they can use their gunsight in an airplane.

[Guest deleted@210880]

1) Type of Improvement : Graphical interface/overlay

 

Proposals : A seperate option to display the radio calls and mission messages sperate to the rest of the HUD; to enable the HUD to be turned off but yet see critical messages for gameplay (leader commands/objective acheived etc..

 

Benefits : Increased immersion, enjoyment.

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

2) Type of Improvement : AI Messages

 

Proposals : Notification of waypoint reached and that flight is turning, ideally with the new heading. Ideally audio file, but a screen message would be useful for now.

 

Benefits : Increased immersion, ability to keep woith flight when they make sudden moves, enjoyment.

[Charon]

Type of Improvement : Control

 

Proposals : Add individual feather-engine keybinds for each engine.

 

Benefits : Consistency with most other engine keybindings, which have duplicates for each engine. Feathering is available mostly (exclusively?) on twins, so there's almost never a reason to want to feather all engines.

 

This feature is a popular request, going back at least to 2014.

 

The new no-techchat option also makes this more pressing, as when playing without techchat there's no good way to check which engines you have selected.

Edited May 28, 2020 by Charon

[Voyager]

Type of improvement: Historical Accuracy/Miscellaneous

Explanation of proposals: P-51B/C Rear tank available as an aircraft mod

 

Benefits:

GA&A noted in the P-47 Pt 6 video (Range and Treachery) that the P-51B/C aircraft did not initially come equipped with the aft fuel tank, but that it was available as a retrofit kit, which was later applied to most aircraft in the field. Making this an aircraft modification would allow the aircraft to be handled as both the balanced 180 gallon version, and as the later, unbalanced 260 gallon later war variants, such that the aircraft would be appropriate for both the early version, and late war version of the P-51B. It would also mean that the default version would not require the code necessary on the P-51D to set it to ~70% fueled by default to prevent the GoC issues.

[Guest deleted@210880]

Type of Improvement : HUD/icons/gameplay

 

Proposals : An option to 'just have icons on your friendly flight (in air and on the map)'.

 

Benefits : An intermediate level of icon 'support' may be of use/interest for some players.

 

Being able to track just your flight in a battle helps with getting to know your wingmen and add depth to the career, but one may not always wish to at the same time see the enemy who you  have no radio contact or mutual understanding with!

 

It can be frustrating to lose the flight as they do a sharp waypoint turn, or going through cloud sometimes, and there is no way for them to tell you where they are, nor can you tell them that you have lost them; they simply carry on without a care that one of their group is missing. Being able to 'cheat' and see just see their location on the map (or as air icons) can help keep the mission together for the sake of gameplay and enjoyment but without giving the player too much information such as the locations of the enemy, or even other friendly flights.

[LukeFF]

Type of improvement: historical accuracy

 

Explanation of proposal: the ability to set a desired course heading with the repeater compass

 

Benefits: expanded navigation tools, ability to more easily hold a course when flying a plane fitted with such a compass (right now, almost all German and American planes have a compass fitted with the ability to set a desired course heading).

[Ribbon]

On 3/13/2020 at 2:54 PM, 56RAF_Roblex said:

Type of improvement: 

 ---Selectable 'Alternate Skins' 

Explanation of proposals:

 

Currently when a player uses a custom skin then anyone that does not have that skin on their PC sees the default official skin.   This is a real problem on winter maps as the default is always a Summer skin.   You could solve that by having an official Winter skin as well as the Summer skin and selecting which one players will see based on the season of the map.  There is still an issue though as the games visibility system makes silver skins stand out clearly from 9Km whatever the season and anyone using a muted custom skin on a P51 or P47s etc will have a silver skin by default.  The only way to cure that is to make the official default not be silver or to add a file alongside the custom DDs file that specifies which official skin you want to be used as the default.

Benefits:

 

Allow custom skins to be used in multiplayer without issues. 
This may not seem important to many people but I have a large squadron and we use custom skins to help us know who is who.

Example 

 

^^THIS^^ 

//out of reaction points//

 

Also:

Type of improvement: adding two level zoom to VR (old one as first stage and new one as a second stage)

 

Explanation: old vr zoom was very helpful on ground units spotting as they often disappear on short distances in different angles of view, and new VR zoom is great for plane ID soo having two stage zoom would ve best solution.

 

Thank you!

[INVADER_WARHAWK]

Type of improvement: Jettison stores at unlimited ammo fix

 

Explanation of proposals: when unlimited ammo is been chosen, the jettison stores function becomes useless since what has been jettisoned reappears on the aircraft. Proposal is: once jetisson stores is been used, jettisoned payload should no longer reappear in the aircraft regardless of the difficulity setting 

 

Benefits: Proper function of jettison stores at any difficulty, and all the benefits this provided by this function.  

[Guest deleted@210880]

Type of improvement: AI
 

Explanation of proposals: Some script or built in trigger so the AI knows their aircraft is in bad shape and goes home. This 109 chased two p40s home to their airbase with a damaged wing, no ruddder and no canopy. Heroic, yes, but spoils the enjoyment. This was in PWCG though not the stock campaign. I think I read that there are settings for how keenly an aircraft follows orders, but surely even on the most keen setting if the aircraft looks like this it should disengage and head home?

 

(Ideal solution woudl be a morale system that can weigh up numbers, damage etc. and make a decision...)

Benefits: Realism/Immersion

Edited May 29, 2020 by deleted@210880

[=FEW=Hauggy]

Type of improvement: new simple modification for the mig-3, the removal of the cockpit canopy.
 

Explanation of proposals: I have just read Alexander Ivanovich Pokryshkin's book (translated to French and printed in the 60's) and in his book I have found that the author mentions a peculiar modification that the pilots made to their migs. After realizing that the canopy had a tendency to get stuck and loosing some of their fellow pilots as a result of this issue, they simply decided to have the canopy removed.

 

Benefits: Realism/Immersion and ability to bail out easily with a bit of added rearward visibility

Edited May 29, 2020 by =FEW=Hauggy

[Pikestance]

Type of improvement: Graphics
 

Explanation of proposals: An options to change the icons in game to something less "informative" (Directions, a/c type, etc...) to simple dot. or Triangle like with this mod. The options could be what you have now and a small triangle. A possible "third" option would be to have a "black dot" for all planes for added difficulty. 
 

Benefits: Many players lack the equipment or are new to the game and is therefore hesitant to play MP for these reasons. By allowing for a choice in icon, servers could be created with these less obtrusive icons and thus promote MP which increase the play-ability of the game. This could prove to be a more realistic stepping stone in players slowly weening themselves off the use of icons to spot planes. 

[Guest deleted@210880]

Type of Improvement : Commands to flight

 

Proposals :

 

Attack Fighters

Attack Bombers

 

also

 

Designate commands to a single aircraft not just the whole flight

 

So the RTB command can therefore mean for a single aircraft:

 

"Go home (you are damaged)"

 

As it is your options are quite limited and the inability to send a single damaged flight member home means they are much likely to die.

 

Benefits : Increased immersion, enjoyment and pilot/mission success

[Hypertexthero]

Type of improvement: Gameplay

Explanation of proposals: More Quick Missions with fun, not necessarily historical random objectives, like using an armed airplane to deliver mail.

Benefits: Quick Missions to deliver mail to random locations, with random enemy machines that try to stop you, and mission success upon successful landing and taxiing to the objective, with a page that keeps track of your overall statistics could make the game more approachable and fun to more people with little time to invest in the longer missions of the campaign. Here is more information about the idea, as well as a short amateur example mission called Combat Air Mail.

Edited June 1, 2020 by Hypertexthero
links

[TAIPAN_]

Type of improvement: Interface

Explanation of proposals: The old game engine (Rise of Flight) showed statistics for our pilot. This included things like:

• Hours per aircraft model
• Number of sorties
• Number of landings
• Number of air to air kills and assists, how many fighters/bombers killed
• Number and type of ground kills
• Screenshot below shows example from Rise of Flight manual

Benefits:

• A feeling of continuity/persistence to a a player that goes beyond just a single career or mission
• Keep track of which aircraft are getting the most attention
• A permanent record for any careers that died/ended - their records still get added to your account total record
• Some unique records can be added (similar to steam "achievements" system), e.g. rare kills like how many bombers shot down with rockets, how many landings with no engine etc

 

[TAIPAN_]

Type of improvement: Gameplay

Explanation of proposals: Career mode: Keep airfield defenses until landing time (or re-add them on approach).

Career mode airfields defenses currently get removed/cleaned up while on mission (example missions in career: Il-2 1941 - 503rd from start of war)

When arriving back to the airfield, they do not re-spawn and only 1 single flak cannon is left. The barricades are still there but weapons are gone.

The result is enemy is able to attack constantly on landing approach and strafe the airfield continuously.

Flying the same type of mission in PWCG when the enemy AI follows all the way to the airfield they are shot down by ground fire within a few minutes and we can land safely. PWCG either re-spawns them or keeps them there for the whole mission, ideally career mode could do the same.

 

Benefits: Players do not have to bail out when chased by the enemy, and have the option of trying to survive until the airfield at which point the enemy can be driven away with ground fire

Edited June 4, 2020 by Dan_Taipan
Updated detail after flying another mission

[Sonntagskind]

Type of improvement: Gameplay / Tank Crew

Explanation of proposals: I think there should be some kind of a reticle for the tank commander which is shown regardless of difficulty settings. Right now, when in the commander's position, a small targeting circle is shown after opening the command menu only if object and/or navigation markers are turned on (as far as I know). Using that circle, you can assign waypoints to the driver/tanks in the platoon ("move to point") and assign targets to your gunner/to the platoon. However, that circle only appears if "object and/or navigation markers" are turned on in the difficulty settings (as far as I know). Unfortunately, turning "object markers" on takes a lot of thrill from commanding a tank since spotting and identification of potential targets is not really required anymore. On the other hand, if you turn object markers and navigation markers off, the little circle does not appear anymore and the  "move to point" command becomes quite useless, since you can only guess where the assigned waypoint might be. It also becomes nearly impossible to assign a target to your gunner and, more importantly, to other tanks in the platoon. 

Benefits: It would enable the commander of a tank platoon to assign targets to the other tanks in the platoon, which is next to impossible right now if "object and navigation markers" are turned off. Players in the tank commander position can effectively order the driver to move to a certain point and can order the gunner to attack a certain target even under realistic difficulty settings. Spotting of targets would still be important. It makes playing Tank Crew in the commanders position more realistic.

Edited June 8, 2020 by Hermod

[Gunter_Severloh]

Type of improvement:     5) Interface

Add more tool tips to controls in key mapping like what's currently setup in custom difficulty premission.

Explanation of proposals:

       For new and regular pilots alike,  it would help those who are not to clear or understanding exactly what

a key does, or how it works ingame, having a brief, or short laymens terms description when you

hover your mouse cursor over a key could clear up confusion as to why or what something does.

          Being new to the game i find it rather difficult to understand what keys do what exactly ingame, plane terminology or physics

of the plane is something i am still learning, but to better learn what functions keys perform, we need at least a small description

with an associative reference, otherwise one has to do some searching outside of the game be it through video, references, or even

asking questions on the forum here about a key or some function.

        Have an option to turn tool tips on or off.

Benefits:

Making the controls & key interface (controls & options) more intuitive and user friendly for all players

regardless of their flying background, or experience in and out of IL2.

[Gunter_Severloh]

Type of improvement:   Options menu

Add a field manual to the menu of the game, with details on how to do things, and what controls you

set in relation to the function.

Explanation of proposals:

Add a field manual to the game's menu, the idea is inspired by a game i play alot (Arma3), see screenshot:

Field Manual image (imgur)

In this game there is a field manual that breaks down every subject in terms of function, you have a

title for a subject, then underneath that a arrow you click on that will expand a list key of subjects, each key subject has its own description,

or information about that subject.

    In some of the subjects for function, the descriptions for a key subject will sometimes have keys from the controls link in there

so for example lets say a subject in IL2 was dropping bombs, then underneath that subject you had bomb types, and sizes, bombing distances. ect,.

    Manual Bombing

    --> Bomb Sizes/weights

               Description - 100, 250, 500, 1000kg  can be dropped using the Bomb drop, drop canister, parachute key ( key currently set for this action)

    --> Calculating bomb distances, drops

   ---> Best bombs for what targets

==============

Thats just one subject of many you could have in the game see screenshot as example reference,

there are many subjects between simple functions, features to complex.

Benefits:

The benefits of such a manual would save players alot of time if they had a question, concern, or needed a reference to look at while ingame

they could simply press escape and go to the field manual and look up the subject of interest and get some information on

it be it understanding what something does and why, which would also list the associative key you set for a certain function.

      Why chase and search for things, a new player to the game unless they are forum savy, and are apt to research, wont otherwise seek out information

unless they were serious enough to do so, thats not to say they wouldn't but if there was a field manual already in place then that could be

a good starting point, considering that the actual manual to IL2 is on the forum, and not a copy in the game's directory.

Edited June 7, 2020 by Gunter_Severloh