Translated QA

[Denum]

Congratulations on your new position @Gavrick!

 

 

Also thank you @Sneaksie for taking the time to translate that for us. 

 

I really enjoy when developers to little Q/A videos.

[kendo]

For anyone, like me, wondering what was going on.....  ?

 

 

[Voidhunger]

"

We made tanks module because in 2011 our lead programmer made a tank chassis prototype for a side project (even before we have started working on BoS).

 

- We have discussed what the next project will be and now the team has an energy surge. "

 

Next project for BOX or TC?

[Enigma89]

Quote

Unlike other modern sims where an aircraft carrier, if modeled, is a small fraction of the whole product and any shortcomings of its modeling don’t affect the quality of the whole sim, in the case of an integral, all-in-one BoX title about the war in the Pacific EVERYTHING should revolve around carrier operations and a carrier is ought to be its central part. This means that any shortcomings of the carrier modeling and interaction with it, any performance and other issues that may arise become super-critical, jeopardizing the whole product. In the current situation this makes it a huge risk we can't afford to spend 3 years on.

 

Seems like Pacific is not coming. I would like to get the word out that we have been organizing a large community playing IL-2 1946 events in the Pacific. This last weekend we had 85+ people come and played for 4 hours. 

 

We will be reviving the SEOW code and doing a persistent dynamic campaign on a monthly-cadence. If you would like to be a part of it please join us on our discord or find more information here in the interim:

 

 

[Voidhunger]

3 minutes ago, Enigma89 said:

 

Seems like Pacific is not coming. I would like to get the word out that we have been organizing a large community playing IL-2 1946 events in the Pacific. This last weekend we had 85+ people come and played for 4 hours. 

 

We will be reviving the SEOW code and doing a persistent dynamic campaign on a monthly-cadence. If you would like to be a part of it please join us on our discord or find more information here in the interim:

 

 

 

Yep, it seems to me that Marshall, Pacific and TC 2 is not coming. Russia is my bet for the next BOX.

[=GEMINI=IngegnerTommy]

3 minutes ago, Enigma89 said:

 

Seems like Pacific is not coming. I would like to get the word out that we have been organizing a large community playing IL-2 1946 events in the Pacific. This last weekend we had 85+ people come and played for 4 hours. 

 

We will be reviving the SEOW code and doing a persistent dynamic campaign on a monthly-cadence. If you would like to be a part of it please join us on our discord or find more information here in the interim:

 

 

 

That's very nice, if only i wasn't 100% addicted to VR i'd give it a go.

Regarding the podcast:

Positive things:
- a new module is confirmed and apparently exciting enough to energize the dev team, look forward to the announcement!
- good to hear the team is solid and not affected by the recent changes!

Negative things:

- Carries ops never happening, that's a pity because it automatically eliminates not only Pacific but also Malta or Sicily I guess, which would have been interesting scenarios. 

- Marshal MP not happening, that's extremely frustrating news to hear, from the perspective of somebody who spends few night every week from years on this game in MP. I understand the complexity but the feeling remains that MP is somewhat neglected 

- No mention for anything that could bring something new to the table (in MP), like flyable medium/heavy bombers or torpedoes. Would be nice to see some new "game dynamic" in the future

I really hope to see a 2023 bringing something really new and exciting for BoX, but certainly is difficult to imagine it in this moment.. 

[Ribbon]

Pretty much confirmed PTO and carrier ops part of MTO is off the table?.

 

Sometimes you need to take risk to attract new players and keep the current ones, honestly taking in mind what we already have i don't see myself buying anything else beside B25 (if it ever happens), i did support this product with my wallet for years in hope someday we'll see bombers and PTO.....my fault, lesson learned and no hard feelings!

[Hitcher]

Announce late eastern front so I can insta-buy it! 

[Voidhunger]

Its a shame that they didnt change the engine, the other sim/sims is/are absolutely no threat.

Just imagine -no time dilation, 4engined bombers and Me163 , BOB, more units in the air and on the ground etc.

[Denum]

23 minutes ago, =GEMINI=IngegnerTommy said:

Carries ops never happening, that's a pity because it automatically eliminates not only Pacific but also Malta or Sicily I guess, which would have been interesting scenarios. 

 

I wouldn't take his answer as a never, it's just saying that they can't focus a module around carrier ops yet.

 

That's where I think Malta would be perfect, because the carrier isn't essential to gameplay so if for some reason they can't make the carrier work it doesn't hurt the module nearly as bad as attempting to do the Pacific.

 

Edited September 27, 2022 by Denum

[Jade_Monkey]

Just now, Voidhunger said:

Its a shame that they didnt change the engine, the other sim/sims is/are absolutely no threat.

Just imagine -no time dilation, 4engined bombers and Me163 , BOB, more units in the air and on the ground etc.

They are very aware, I remember Jason mentioning it as a consideration a while back in an interview. The choice is between existing vendor vs enhancing in-house. It doesn't mean they'll never change it, just that they are not going with 3rd party.

 

If anything they have demonstrated they ARE enhancing the current engine (clouds, lighting, etc), so I have faith they will eventually tackle some performance enhancements.

[Eisenfaustus]

I don‘t think „no carriers“ automatically means „no Italy“ - they just ruled out the pacific. 
 

And from what I understood they also said at some other point early war is only interesting for hardcore fanboys. 

 

Leaving more or less Italy or late east in the race - or something we haven’t thought of yet

[Enceladus828]

I don't understand why the devs are so adamant that no carriers = no Pacific. People have suggested that the first Pacific installment start somewhere interesting but with no carriers such as Guadalcanal. You would be able to include American and Japanese planes and ships, and the Pilot Career mode would be interesting, not flying many hours over and open ocean encountering the enemy a few times. With all of this out of the way, the next Pacific installment can have carriers if they're ready.

My requirements for a Pacific theater installment in this game - Suggestions - IL-2 Sturmovik Forum (il2sturmovik.com)

 

28 minutes ago, =GEMINI=IngegnerTommy said:

Carries ops never happening, that's a pity because it automatically eliminates not only Pacific but also Malta or Sicily I guess, which would have been interesting scenarios. 

They can still do Sicily as carriers saw limited action during Operation Husky so leaving them out would be okay.

[Chief_Mouser]

Sooo....as I see it from all we've heard including today -  PTO carrier ops no; Japanese planes generally (so no New Guinea) no; Med carrier ops no; large formations of four-engined bombers no; RAF night-bombing campaign no; BoB no; North Africa no; Korea (carriers again) no. So what's left if all of the really early war is left out?

 

Malta, Italy, late-war Eastern Front, Leningrad / Finland; Murmansk?

Personally, I hope for some Italian planes to keep me interested, although all of those except late-war Germany would be fun.

[CountZero]

34 minutes ago, =GEMINI=IngegnerTommy said:

 

That's very nice, if only i wasn't 100% addicted to VR i'd give it a go.

Regarding the podcast:

Positive things:
- a new module is confirmed and apparently exciting enough to energize the dev team, look forward to the announcement!
- good to hear the team is solid and not affected by the recent changes!

Negative things:

- Carries ops never happening, that's a pity because it automatically eliminates not only Pacific but also Malta or Sicily I guess, which would have been interesting scenarios. 

- Marshal MP not happening, that's extremely frustrating news to hear, from the perspective of somebody who spends few night every week from years on this game in MP. I understand the complexity but the feeling remains that MP is somewhat neglected 

- No mention for anything that could bring something new to the table (in MP), like flyable medium/heavy bombers or torpedoes. Would be nice to see some new "game dynamic" in the future

I really hope to see a 2023 bringing something really new and exciting for BoX, but certainly is difficult to imagine it in this moment.. 

Problem with Marshal is its build inside of game, i knew imidiatly that that kined of thing cant work without worsening performance in MP we have that is already streched to max. Same would be with in game voic. This kined of things need to be outside of game apps, Enigma mentioned SEOW, this is right way to add comand & control aspect to game, outside of game and have no imact on performance while gives so mutch to players to plan missions, control it by radar and reading instantly logs from game and other stuff for ground units and so on... its basicly like separate indy strategy game that is using old il-2 to play missions that are planed and have some kined of control in air battles.

Im glad they didnt forced adding Marshall without doing big optimasation to net in MP.

Edited September 27, 2022 by CountZero

[Denum]

Just so we can avoid seeing this locked, if you guys want to sulk about the carriers there's other threads for that.

 

I can honestly say whatever the next module is no matter where it is and when it is I'm buying it.

[BMA_FlyingShark]

1 minute ago, Denum said:

I can honestly say whatever the next module is no matter where it is and when it is I'm buying it.

That makes 2 of us.

 

Have a nice day.

 

[Eisenfaustus]

1 minute ago, Enceladus said:

and the Pilot Career mode would be interesting, not flying many hours over and open ocean

I get their drift here. 
There are history nerds who’d instantly agree with you but the huge mass of potential customers read PTO=carrier ops. And assume 20 minute missions are the norm.

[Voidhunger]

At this point (and im looking forward for new late war German planes) I would really like to have some big improvements to the engine.

I wantt 4 engined bombers I really do, but the time dilation is what is killing the game for me and I just cant play it anymore.

 

[=EXPEND=CG_Justin]

So, where do we go from here? Heavies?

[Ribbon]

36 minutes ago, Denum said:

 

I wouldn't take his answer as a never, it's just saying that they can't focus a module around carrier ops yet.

 

That's where I think Malta would be perfect, because the carrier isn't essential to gameplay so if for some reason they can't make the carrier work it doesn't hurt the module nearly as bad as attempting to do the Pacific.

 

If they didn't by now, after 10years and BoBp/BoN i hardly think they ever will.

No bombers, no torpedos, no carriers, no PTO.....just copy paste gameplay since BoS.

Not good formula for videogame development business IMO!

Edited September 27, 2022 by =VARP=Ribbon

[DBFlyguy]

29 minutes ago, Enceladus said:

I don't understand why the devs are so adamant that no carriers = no Pacific.

 

A complete lack of understanding of the war in the Pacific ....  But hey, at least we finally got a answer, no pacific for the foreseeable future from 1C. ?

Edited September 27, 2022 by DBFlyguy

[Ribbon]

6 minutes ago, =EXPEND=CG_Justin said:

So, where do we go from here? Heavies?

Dream on

[CountZero]

14 minutes ago, =EXPEND=CG_Justin said:

So, where do we go from here? Heavies?

Were staying where BoN bring us, Channel 43

[DBFlyguy]

29 minutes ago, Eisenfaustus said:

I get their drift here. 
There are history nerds who’d instantly agree with you but the huge mass of potential customers read PTO=carrier ops. And assume 20 minute missions are the norm.

To this day, still one of the most well known TV shows surrounding the air war in the pacific, "Black Sheep Squadron/Baa Baa Blacksheep" barely even mentions aircraft carriers.  I'd also guess more of the global potential customer base knows what a A6M Zero or Corsair is especially compared to whatever "Yak's" fills the next sure to be eastern front "Battle of"... ?

Edited September 27, 2022 by DBFlyguy

[CountZero]

3 minutes ago, DBFlyguy said:

To this day, still one of the most well known TV shows surrounding the air war in the pacific, "Black Sheep Squadron/Baa Baa Blacksheep" barely even mentions aircraft carriers.  I'd guess more of the global potential customer base knows what a A6M Zero or Corsair is over another random "Yak" is.

Rabaul to vella Lavella 600+km, islands cant be moved closer , carriers can be moved closer, no ones gona care if distance betwen carriers and carriers or island of midway is 100km, ppl gona care if solomons map is not 1:1.  Simple.

[Motherbrain]

Basically all the things I'd look forward to in this combat sim, PTO, carriers, heavies, IJN/IJA aviation, etc, have been confirmed to not be coming. I'm sorry my blind support for this product can only go so far.

 

What does that leave? I'm not buying another eastern front module, especially since it probably won't have a single multi engine bomber in its line up.

 

I'd settle for an Italian theater, but only if it's line up of planes is made up of actual Italian planes we haven't seen before like the Fiat G.50, MC.200 and SM.79 and not more Bf109 versions. And that both sides get a player flyable bomber.

Edited September 27, 2022 by Motherbrain

[Alexmarine]

Just now, Motherbrain said:

I'd settle for an Italian theater, but only if it's line up of planes is made up of actual Italian planes like the Fiat G.50, MC.200 and SM.79 and not more Bf109 versions. And that both sides get a player flyable bomber.

 

I have no bias against a final Ostfront title (I do wish to have a final chapter for my soviets careers pilots) but for the MTO I wholeheartedly agree with you 

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

Certainly a fair amount of island based unit in the pacific.  Carriers not actually necessary for WW2 pacific theater fun.  

[parkerc341]

Hopefully its MTO then

[Lusekofte]

1 hour ago, =VARP=Ribbon said:

Pretty much confirmed PTO and carrier ops part of MTO is off the table?.

 

Sometimes you need to take risk to attract new players and keep the current ones, honestly taking in mind what we already have i don't see myself buying anything else beside B25 (if it ever happens), i did support this product with my wallet for years in hope someday we'll see bombers and PTO.....my fault, lesson learned and no hard feelings!

I bought TC (never used) bobp and fc for supporting pto. Fc2 I bought for the bombers. I awaited C 47, and hope for a flyable latewar bomber or B 26. 

I no longer support any franchise for anything else than what I find interesting. 

Not because of the abandoned PTO project. But , infact this game stay at the same complexity level as old IL 2 but have less to offer.

I find it understandable, that budget will not allowe for PTO, I blame nothing to the developers. They chosen a fighter focused fps gameplay, with a game engine not coping for the complexity I hoped for. I therefor see no reason for me to continue. But what is going on today with the world. I find it really hard to really care

 

Edited September 27, 2022 by LuseKofte

[Avimimus]

1 hour ago, 216th_Cat said:

Sooo....as I see it from all we've heard including today -  PTO carrier ops no; Japanese planes generally (so no New Guinea) no; Med carrier ops no; large formations of four-engined bombers no; RAF night-bombing campaign no; BoB no; North Africa no; Korea (carriers again) no. So what's left if all of the really early war is left out?

 

Malta, Italy, late-war Eastern Front, Leningrad / Finland; Murmansk?

Personally, I hope for some Italian planes to keep me interested, although all of those except late-war Germany would be fun.

 

Well, I think the message is more nuanced... they don't feel like it is an appropriate time to risk developing Carrier tech (but if they did, they would do it well), some important Japanese aircraft are too poorly documented (so they might have to interpolate or use guesswork to a degree that might be unacceptable to the community), four engined bombers would consume a lot of resources (but are theoretically possible), early war 1939-1941 scenarios aren't as popular and so are unlikely (especially in the Eastern European theatre), niche vehicles (e.g. anti-aircraft vehicles, light tanks) aren't as popular as heavier tanks and so are unlikely in the near term, they would like to do radar but have doubts that sales could cover the programming costs.

 

I think they haven't ruled out anything - just ruled out taking the leap in any of these directions in the near term. If their user base increases in size and it becomes easier to fund projects which have an appeal to only a smaller part of the player base or to fund more expensive projects... then they might revisit any of these things.

 

I do wonder if a land based Pacific scenario (without any carriers) could be viable? Or a 1948-1955 European scenario (again without carriers)?

 

The interview does make me think that we'll be going '45 East - which makes a lot of sense - the late-war German plane-set is already there and the Russians really ought to have P-39Q/La-7/Yak-3/Tu-2. IMHO, it'd be very interesting if they have to model some more obscure aircraft in order to give the Germans a nice plane-set (Fi-156? Ju-188?) although they could include the Bf-109G10, Fw-190A9 and possibly the He-162 (collector aircraft).

 

For those complaining - they honestly have to fill in the 1943-1945 Eastern Front at some point - its omission is pretty glaringly obvious (for anyone whose tried taking a Yak-7 up against an Me-262 anyway)  So it may as well be now.

 

 

  

8 minutes ago, LuseKofte said:

I bought TC (never used) bobp and fc for supporting pto. Fc2 I bought for the bombers.

 

I delayed buying TC, but it is actually quite a bit of fun once one figures out the weak spots on the enemy tanks and how to use the lay of the land - so I'd suggest actually giving it a try. FC2 also has some great aircraft other than the bombers... so I do hope you've explored it fully... because it'd be a shame to miss out on flying down city streets in the Sopwith triplane etc. ?

[CAFulcrum]

They could do a number of pacific modules that don't rely on carriers, in a buildup to a carrier specific module.  imo pacific would be a lot more lucrative than another russian module, even without carrier operations.  There are a ton of specialty aircraft they could offer that people go nuts over like the PBY, P61, B25H, Beaufighter, Zero seaplane etc.

 

There are still gaps in the russian and german planeset though for them to explore, and Italy could be done as well though they'll have as much trouble researching Italian planes as Japanese.  I would sort of expect Berlin next as well, but if they aren't going to model 4-engine bombers it's kind of hard to see the point.  That's the biggest relevant 'hole' in the sim right now (as opposed to wanting things that aren't currently in and aren't related to the modeled theatres, like carriers).  

Edited September 27, 2022 by CAFulcrum

[Guest deleted@83466]

Sorry Brubaker, this means you too…

 

[Hitcher]

"if it isn't what I want I will no longer support this product" - some simboomer in his cream cargo shorts 

[Ptolemy_Soter]

No Pacific is more "we can't make Japanese planes" rather than "we can't make carriers".

I really hoped the video card poll was a first step toward a graphical enhancement but no...

The game is aging. Yes, effects are better than before but 3D is unchanged.

 

Oh and for the next module, I'm sure it will be the less risky : late war russian front.

[Avimimus]

20 minutes ago, CAFulcrum said:

There are still gaps in the russian and german planeset though for them to explore, and Italy could be done as well though they'll have as much trouble researching Italian planes as Japanese. 

 

I'm not sure about that. I know that Japanese and some French aircraft had a lot of documents lost - but I'm less certain about Italian.

 

Sometimes it is quite surprising - for instance the WWI Italian front is exceptionally well documented. I put together a list of aircraft and about 70% had a surviving example - some of the others had surviving factory drawings in such detail that perfect flying replicas have been created. It is rather shocking actually - Ansaldo S.V.A.5, Aviatik (Berg) D.I, Hansa Brandenburg (Phönix) C.I, Hansa Brandenburg D., Oeffag Albatros, Caproni Ca.3, Macchi M.5, Hansa-Brandenburg FB/W.13, Caudron G.4 even the FBA "H" or Macchi M.3! Even some cockpit references for the Mickl H 'blue wonder' survive...

 

There are a few gaps of course - I haven't found any cockpit references for the Hansa-Brandenburg "CC" or W.18 (let me know if you spot any), but some of the Austro-Hungarian aircraft are much better documented than some German aircraft... it doesn't feel that way though - because we are less familiar with the theatre generally. Anyway, I got distracted - but the general point is that what is or isn't well documented is often quite surprising (and unpredictable).

[Denum]

28 minutes ago, Hitcher said:

"if it isn't what I want I will no longer support this product" - some simboomer in his cream cargo shorts 

 

Bingo.

 

I think people drastically underestimate the financial cost of these modules. 

 

I don't blame 1C and 777 for being cautious. It's a big gamble. 

 

I'd love to see how much they think the Marshall project cost so far. It would be eye opening for people. 

 

There's alot of money involved and it's a business. 

 

Just winging it is not a good business model either. 

 

They could do the Spanish civil War next for all I care. 

 

I enjoy all the theaters. 

Edited September 27, 2022 by Denum

[Enceladus828]

37 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

some important Japanese aircraft are too poorly documented

Jason said they have enough info about the Zero to make it, and as stated before, for planes such as the Val and the Kate which are dive bombers and torpedo bombers respectively, the FMs don't need to be 99% accurate because they are not fighters. If they have enough info to make the cockpit then that is totally fine. And things like how many ammo magazines the gunner had and whether there is a radio doesn't matter.  

A 5v3 or 4v3 planeset with just the Zero, Kate and Val for the Japanese plane lineup is fine.

[Voidhunger]

I would like to have some change and not again copy paste of the current model