This sounds like music to me

[CountZero]

1 hour ago, FliegerAD said:

 

Indeed. And I wonder why they won't. I know they may still be checking the project viability of their next venture before announcing it, but the situation here demands some statement.

(Also, Russians celebrate Christmas in January, so it is not like they are in Holiyday mode already...)

 

 

I don't mind. ?

...especially when paired with beauties like this:

 

 

?

 

[Jade_Monkey]

5 hours ago, DN308 said:

All of these misteries and some of the previous comments led me to think that my feelings were right.

 I’m afraid about the money I have put into this simulation that can disappear soon. 
I’m afraid that all the little things we have these days (FC snipe and objects, TC Churchill and Stug, AIs only objects) are the sold out of what is ongoing on the last to do list before stopping everything on the existing titles.

 I’m afraid that what could happen then is nothing more. Just another serie or game with nothing to do with the previous one.

My guess (pessimistic one) is that the devs lack of communication is because there’s nothing to communicate on.

 

 

I'm not sure that makes sense. Provided that the game stays playable even if they move on to a new game, then you got exactly what you paid for, no more no less. They are not pulling the rug under you.

5 hours ago, DN308 said:

 

 

 

Edited December 23, 2022 by Jade_Monkey

[danielprates]

Still, it is sad to see that the game was heading towards a good direction, one most people would have been happy with, and Jason leaving made those plans get scrapped (that's what I take from the interview and current context anyway), and changed for something else we're still abiut to see. Worse, whatever comes now, we'll inevitably start comparing with the might-have-been. 

 

Why scrapping Jasons plans though? Maybe the surprise coming along is just that: "we are giving the go-ahead on Jason's unfinished projects and soon you'll have MTO + more allied mediums". Or has that been ruled out?

[amadeusdemarzi]

15 hours ago, Eisenfaustus said:

Jason at some time promised that in case of abandonment all features including career would continue to work offline. I‘m curious if that’s still the case…

As of last night when the auth servers went down, offline was also broken unfortunately. You couldn't get passed the login screen at all

[Enceladus828]

7 hours ago, Rjel said:

my hope is GB continues and expands in one form or another even if that means overlapping CLoD maps or expansions.

The devs have enough places they can do without overlapping on what’s already covered in CloD ?

[Avimimus]

4 hours ago, danielprates said:

Still, it is sad to see that the game was heading towards a good direction, one most people would have been happy with, and Jason leaving made those plans get scrapped (that's what I take from the interview and current context anyway), and changed for something else we're still abiut to see. Worse, whatever comes now, we'll inevitably start comparing with the might-have-been. 

 

Why scrapping Jasons plans though? Maybe the surprise coming along is just that: "we are giving the go-ahead on Jason's unfinished projects and soon you'll have MTO + more allied mediums". Or has that been ruled out?

 

Well from what I gather - they drew up several possibilities (five module concepts), then presented a few of them to the team and had a meeting where the decision was made jointly.

 

From what Jason has said, it sounds like Sicily/Malta/Italy have been passed over (for now at least). I don't think it rules out the possibility though.

 

From the Q&A session it appears that the current project leaders intend to continue making realistic flight simulators. So long as they don't decide to start remaking everything from scratch, and so long as the products remain profitable (or grow in profitability) - it would seem likely that some of the things Jason would have prioritised will get completed eventually (if only because everything else will have been done). Of course, if they start remaking existing modules instead of making new ones, or if it ceases to be financially viable...

[Gambit21]

4 hours ago, danielprates said:

Why scrapping Jasons plans though? Maybe the surprise coming along is just that: "we are giving the go-ahead on Jason's unfinished projects and soon you'll have MTO + more allied mediums". Or has that been ruled out?

 

Eh...no.

I agree with Han and Albert's position on MTO for a few reasons. It's more to take on, especially from a map standpoint that some seem to realize.

Based on history (and I won't wind down that path here) taking on this map is a bad idea.

 

 

I like where this product is going.

 

 

 

 

 

[Lusekofte]

You know I flew around Sydney’s skyscrapers in a beautiful P 38 and under the bridge with smooth performances in vr 

So if they come up with so-called new engine/ game. Should it not be new as per cope with a lot of buildings? Or what is this new they talk about if not improve?

ruling out Italy is not wise and pretty short sighted in my mind. In the long run it is a major battle lost. One can demand more money for more work. 

[JonRedcorn]

4 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

 

Eh...no.

I agree with Han and Albert's position on MTO for a few reasons. It's more to take on, especially from a map standpoint that some seem to realize.

Based on history (and I won't wind down that path here) taking on this map is a bad idea.

 

 

I like where this product is going.

 

 

 

 

 

LOL Where is this product going? You say that like you know whats going on. Enlighten us please.

[Chief_Mouser]

1 hour ago, JonRedcorn said:

LOL Where is this product going? You say that like you know whats going on. Enlighten us please.

 

Oh he does, he does.  ? 

It's obvious; Gambit's been sat here being smug and condescending for quite a while now. Plus slapping down any mention of everything that isn't the PTO. So he knows.

 

C'mon Gambit, give it a break. Your posts used to be informative and worth reading; now you are coming dangerously close to being added to my 'Ignore' list for a while - (now that's frightening for you ?) - or maybe someone will horrify you by gifting you a MC.202. ?

 

 

Btw, Happy Christmas one and all. ?

 

 

[danielprates]

6 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

 

Eh...no.

(...)

I like where this product is going.

 

 

1 hour ago, JonRedcorn said:

LOL Where is this product going? You say that like you know whats going on. Enlighten us please.

 

Eh.... yeah.

 

(Edit: then again... don't. It feels like some people are in the know but have been asked not to open up about it. If so, nevermind. Or maybe you only know to a 99% certainty where it is NOT going. I didn't want to go about armwrestling the 'mto vs pto xs korea' boring argument again. My point was only: up until Jason's days there was a well thought out roadmap and not it feels there isn't).

Edited December 24, 2022 by danielprates

[Trooper117]

I'll admit I'm an advocate of Korea... I only keep saying it's going to be that theatre because I want it, not because I know for sure that's what's coming... so, man up people, it's Korea!  ?

[Alexmarine]

There was a famous real estate TV ad that went: "We don't sell dreams, but solid realities"

 

Roadmaps (remember how the roadmap after Kuban had the PTO?) and a lot of "I wanted to do...", "I wished to..." etc.etc. are definitely in the dreams category 

 

Though I do agree with @Trooper117 above me, if the dreams is about Korea I would take an exception 

Edited December 24, 2022 by Alexmarine

[CountZero]

2 hours ago, danielprates said:

 

 

Eh.... yeah.

 

(Edit: then again... don't. It feels like some people are in the know but have been asked not to open up about it. If so, nevermind. Or maybe you only know to a 99% certainty where it is NOT going. I didn't want to go about armwrestling the 'mto vs pto xs korea' boring argument again. My point was only: up until Jason's days there was a well thought out roadmap and not it feels there isn't).

Considering that he build campaigns and missions for game and he could realy know whats next, if he likes it, that can only mean one thing, Korea MiG Alley 1953...  I remenber long time ago Han said that hes fan of Korea war... but for them to abandon ww2 and go in Korea war now would be bad decision in my opinion...no 109 was given to Koreans as far i know...but maybe they can dig up some secret documents and we get 109 in Korea DLC...only way to make it profitable...but you spend all this time building ww2 fan base and now youll gona let them without DLC for 3years... if anyone likes Korea he already have that in DCS only thing important in Korea war is jet vs jet MiG-15 vs F-86 , and we have that in DCS...  them being silent for so long could realy be because no more ww2 stuff...

Edited December 24, 2022 by CountZero

[Alexmarine]

3 minutes ago, CountZero said:

if anyone likes Korea he already have that in DCS only thing important in Korea war is jet vs jet MiG-15 vs F-86 , and we have that in DCS...  

 

1) If a MiG-15Bis and an F-86F-35 (not even an actual Korean War Sabre) are enough for "Korean War" then Il-2 shouldn't have started at all because a P-51 and a Bf 109K in DCS were enough WW2 (and even had an half baked Normandy map!)

 

2) Korean War was much more than MiG-15 vs F-86, would you say that BoB was just Spifires vs Emils or that the Pacific was just Wildcats vs Zeros?

[CountZero]

8 minutes ago, Alexmarine said:

 

1) If a MiG-15Bis and an F-86F-35 (not even an actual Korean War Sabre) are enough for "Korean War" then Il-2 shouldn't have started at all because a P-51 and a Bf 109K in DCS were enough WW2 (and even had an half baked Normandy map!)

 

2) Korean War was much more than MiG-15 vs F-86, would you say that BoB was just Spifires vs Emils or that the Pacific was just Wildcats vs Zeros?

YES to general player Korea means MiG-15 vs F-86 like Battle of Britain was Spitfire vs 109 or PTO is Zero vs cats... or yaks vs 109s is east front...

 

Like for general player, if you say Italy, he would say ah yes there was ww2 there also...was it Malta and Spitfiers and 109s... or that Casino thing... Italians had their own airplanes, wow who would guess that... where is my 109...

Edited December 24, 2022 by CountZero

[=621=Samikatz]

The devs already said the next project they've chosen is prop-aircraft based, so I find Korea unlikely. Hard to market a sim based entirely on the second-line aircraft without the most famous of all

[MeoW.Scharfi]

Making Korea and therefore Jet fights(with a few high performance propeller planes which still get outperformed in most ways by Sabres and MiGs) would be wasted potential of a game developer who builds excellent propeller flight models.

 

Ohterwise there wouldn't be anyone else who could cover all the other battles. ?

 

So a clear NO from me for Korea.

[CountZero]

20 minutes ago, =621=Samikatz said:

The devs already said the next project they've chosen is prop-aircraft based, so I find Korea unlikely. Hard to market a sim based entirely on the second-line aircraft without the most famous of all

But in that video i belive he didnt exactly say its prop based, he said it will still have props... like it will still be hard core sim  or it will still cover historical battles and so on... i didnt here him say its based on props when i relisend that part.

[migmadmarine]

It could plausably be some continuation war thing using the Finnish team's map, as they did say that the next mainline project involved introducing a new nation, pilot model etc, (Finland) and as I recall it was stated in the Q&A work was already beginning on one of the aircraft for the package? 

[CountZero]

4 minutes ago, migmadmarine said:

It could plausably be some continuation war thing using the Finnish team's map, as they did say that the next mainline project involved introducing a new nation, pilot model etc, (Finland) and as I recall it was stated in the Q&A work was already beginning on one of the aircraft for the package? 

New nation, China, N.Korea... new pilot model.. asian... they said its forgotten history, Korean war is forgotten war ... Finland map is players project, if they planed to officaly do Finland they would not give it to players to do it for free...If Finland come it will most likely be mod map made by players that is in works..

Edited December 24, 2022 by CountZero

[Oyster_KAI]

If a lot of FM and AI and maps are not fixed/enhanced, even if any new campaign Expansion is released, the chances of attracting people back to GB are very low.

[migmadmarine]

Or, they bring the project in house part way through, hell, that would make sense for why that team is apparently not in the position to talk all that openly about their progress. 

[CountZero]

Just now, Oyster_KAI said:

If a lot of FM and AI and maps are not fixed/enhanced, even if any new campaign Expansion is released, the chances of attracting people back to GB are very low.

Fm, DM, AI , maps is complained about since 2014, as long as you give ppl another 109... they will buy no mather what...

1 minute ago, migmadmarine said:

Or, they bring the project in house part way through, hell, that would make sense for why that team is apparently not in the position to talk all that openly about their progress. 

What 10 planset you can do for that map of Leningrad area 1944, map is being build for ?

[Avimimus]

4 minutes ago, CountZero said:

Fm, DM, AI , maps is complained about since 2014, as long as you give ppl another 109... they will buy no mather what...

 

Longer than 2014 if one includes Rise of Flight and Il-2 1946... it is almost like these things are very hard to do and people will never be satisfied (except briefly).

 

You should hear the praise that was heaped on the Il-2 1946 damage model... or how excited people were at the first and second generation moving water - or the forests... people were really blown away by those forests at the time (even though they are invisible from the sides etc.)

 

4 minutes ago, CountZero said:

What 10 planset you can do for that map of Leningrad area 1944, map is being build for ?

 

The nice thing about Leningrad is that it goes 1942-1944 and has Finish aircraft operating in the area as well... so one could fill in a lot of gaps in the existing planesets for those years, include something like the Fw-190A4 and a couple of Finish fighters for the Axis etc. The devs have indicated that they aren't intending us to be able to fly over a large city any time soon though - so that rules out Leningrad for the moment.

[Alexmarine]

45 minutes ago, CountZero said:

YES to general player Korea means MiG-15 vs F-86 like Battle of Britain was Spitfire vs 109 or PTO is Zero vs cats... or yaks vs 109s is east front...

 

Like for general player, if you say Italy, he would say ah yes there was ww2 there also...was it Malta and Spitfiers and 109s... or that Casino thing... Italians had their own airplanes, wow who would guess that... where is my 109...

 

"General Players" will be re-educated and given new insights into our cause 

[migmadmarine]

Well, the finns kept a quite a number of their older types still in service through the end of their role in the war, so pretty much any of the finnish fighters/bombers for axis, then I'm not precisely up on VVS units in that theater off the top of my head (and I'm probably not going to get terribly good research while I'm sitting here trying to fight off 24hoursinairportdelirium (god I wish I had just taken the train again), but could be a chance for some later versions of soviet 43 models, given it wasn't exactly the core front for the USSR. 

 

Call a rough lineup:
Brewster 239
Morkko-Morane
Fokker DXXI
Curtis Hawk 75
Blenheim or Do 17. 

(finns would of course also use the existing Ju88a4 and Bf-109G2 and G6, maybe even the BoM Pe-2)

vs

66 series LaGG-3

Later yak 9
Possibly yak 3 early or la7 early? 

arrow wing Il-2
Some russian medium bomber, maybe tu2 or another peshka version? 
any applicable BOS/BOK collector soviet types could be brought in. 

Even if you're right about it only possibly being implemented as a community free release like the Veliki Luki map, I hope given the size and the prospects of at least collector aircraft to go with it that a career mode implementation will be made for it. 

 

Also, if they were to bring the Finland map in-house, that could have the advantage of side-stepping the limitations around making large cities (which has been given as dev-manhours time, if they are bringing the project in with even 20% of map assets made, then that frees up quite a lot of manhours. 

[DBFlyguy]

It's awesome how every thread devolves into "my dream list of airplanes/theater" only to be closed or merged cause we're now "off topic"... completely ignoring the fact that most of the recent threads could be solved if Han...Albert...or whoever is actually in charge ever bothered to take the 5-10 minutes out of their day to answer legitimate lingering questions...its been months... I thought they were "excited for something new" ?

 

But while we're at it, I'll take a Soccer War "battle of"...Corsairs vs Mustangs.... cause why not ?

[DD_Crash]

I am sure JackFraiser could provide a list

[Guest deleted@83466]

What a refreshingly no-bulls$#t interview.  The remaining team should notice that being honest about challenges goes over a lot better with most customers than the “everything is wonderful, nothing has changed, why do you ask?” policy they have currently adopted.

Good for JW that he chose to move on.

 

[CountZero]

33 minutes ago, migmadmarine said:

Well, the finns kept a quite a number of their older types still in service through the end of their role in the war, so pretty much any of the finnish fighters/bombers for axis, then I'm not precisely up on VVS units in that theater off the top of my head (and I'm probably not going to get terribly good research while I'm sitting here trying to fight off 24hoursinairportdelirium (god I wish I had just taken the train again), but could be a chance for some later versions of soviet 43 models, given it wasn't exactly the core front for the USSR. 

 

Call a rough lineup:
Brewster 239
Morkko-Morane
Fokker DXXI
Curtis Hawk 75
Blenheim or Do 17. 

(finns would of course also use the existing Ju88a4 and Bf-109G2 and G6, maybe even the BoM Pe-2)

vs

66 series LaGG-3

Later yak 9
Possibly yak 3 early or la7 early? 

arrow wing Il-2
Some russian medium bomber, maybe tu2 or another peshka version? 
any applicable BOS/BOK collector soviet types could be brought in. 

Even if you're right about it only possibly being implemented as a community free release like the Veliki Luki map, I hope given the size and the prospects of at least collector aircraft to go with it that a career mode implementation will be made for it. 

 

Also, if they were to bring the Finland map in-house, that could have the advantage of side-stepping the limitations around making large cities (which has been given as dev-manhours time, if they are bringing the project in with even 20% of map assets made, then that frees up quite a lot of manhours. 

So by that logic, their next DLC is east front, on map that have to have big urban area in center, city of Leningrad, and cant have 109/190 or late war vvs stuff, better option then doing Poland 45, map without big citys (betwen Berlin and Warsaw) and you can have all late war airplanes ppl ask for... if they are doing another East front, give me a reason why they would not do east front area of battle that can have 109G10 190A9 Yak-3 and La-7 and easy to build map for it, half the size of this player made Finland map... no logic what so ever in them doing Finland when they didnt do better and easyer option even if map is build by players, they have to check if its quality or even playable for campaign on it... its 512km x 512km from their meta post about it, thats area double in size of biggest map in game now, and it have to have biggest city any game map now have... i do not know how anyone expect map to be playable with any decent FPS...

Edited December 24, 2022 by CountZero

[Avimimus]

7 minutes ago, CountZero said:

So by that logic, their next DLC is east front, on map that have to have big urban area in center, city of Leningrad, and cant have 109/190 or late war vvs stuff, better option then doing Poland 45, map without big citys (betwen Berlin and Warsaw) and you can have all late war airplanes ppl ask for... if they are doing another East front, give me a reason why they would not do east front area of battle that can have 109G10 190A9 Yak-3 and La-7 and easy to build map for it, half the size of this player made Finland map... no logic what so ever in them doing Finland when they didnt do better and easyer option even if map is build by players, they have to check if its quality or even playable for campaign on it... its 512km x 512km from their meta post about it, thats area double in size of biggest map in game now, and it have to have biggest city any game map now have... i do not know how anyone expect map to be playable with any decent FPS...

 

Well, if I were them I'd develop '45 East first, then Leningrad later (when computing power has improved) to 'cap off' the Eastern European theatre and fill in any gaps...

 

Somewhere in between I'd develop a 1942-1944 Channel "Half-Module" DLC with improvements to the BoN map and a few additional aircraft (Mustang Mk.1, maybe a British operated Avenger or Beaufighter, more variants of existing aircraft etc.) and maybe an Italian 1943-1944 module to tide over the Western Front crowd.

[Missionbug]

Finland does not necessarily need to include Leningrad, when they originally mentioned the Finnish map, it was going to be the Gulf of Finland with land eater side if memory serves so no need to go as far as the city. Besides that, there is a huge swathe of land between the gulf and Murmansk and sideways we can also include parts of Karelia it just depends on how you cut it up, not many big settlements in all that area just lots of trees and water with some large towns many airfields and lots of potential with a huge list of wonderful early and late war aircraft that can also be used on existing maps.

 

Just saying.

 

Take care and be safe.

 

Wishing you all the very best, Pete.

 

 

Edited December 24, 2022 by Missionbug

[Gambit21]

7 hours ago, JonRedcorn said:

LOL Where is this product going? You say that like you know whats going on. Enlighten us please.

I mean it’s in good hands.

Thats’s all I’m going to say.

 

Open to 3rd parties etc for one thing.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

1 hour ago, SeaSerpent said:

What a refreshingly no-bulls$#t interview.  The remaining team should notice that being honest about challenges goes over a lot better with most customers than the “everything is wonderful, nothing has changed, why do you ask?” policy they have currently adopted.

Good for JW that he chose to move on.

 

 

 

I'm sorry SeaSerpent but I disagree. Albert "Loft" Zhiltsov and Daniel "Han" Tuseev admitted in an recently published video that they struggled for years and finally ended up by failing at their attempts of implementing drop tanks and fuel systems management in "Great Battles". They said that such a feature will be available in their next core engine (the "next-gen product" mentioned by Jason in the interview we talk about here). They never said that the interaction between an aircraft carrier and a plane is impossible to model with the "Great Battles" core engine... but they admitted they dropped the idea because that would be too time consuming and financially disastrous. Such statements were made after Jason departure so let me say that Loft and Han are at least as honest as Jason is, they are not simply saying “everything is wonderful, nothing has changed, why do you ask?”, the situation, in my humble opinion, is more complex thant that and the conflict between Jason and 1CGS is a bit more subtle thant that. Jason gave some explanations, a summary of the big picture, but my suspicion is that he didn't explain everything that is related to his departure. Furthermore, Jason gave me the impression he was very cautious in this interview, and I approve that.

 

 

Edited December 24, 2022 by 343KKT_Kintaro
that struggled for years --> that they struggled for years

[von_Tom]

It’s worth pointing out that we haven’t heard both sides and until we do (if we ever do…) it isn’t great jumping onto the side of whoever speaks first. There are lots of gaps in the information and ultimately is it really our business?
 

Also, Stalingrad and Moscow were not Jason’s babies and they were/are pretty good and worth revisiting especially with all of the game engine updates that keep coming. That suggests that future elements will also be good. 
 

The angst about the GB direction also seems too much to me. We’ll find out eventually and then, as now, people can decide what to buy or not buy. 

Merry Christmas everyone, regardless of religious belief, though if you believe in animism watch out for the spirit in your Christmas tree. 
 

von Tom

 

[343KKT_Kintaro]

1 minute ago, von_Tom said:

The angst about the GB direction also seems too much to me.

 

 

I definitely agree with that. Mainly because, after Jason had quit, the current bosses of Great Battles (Zhiltsov & subordinates + the right holders at 1C Company) already summarised the future of the series:

 

- The "Flying Circus" series of modules will be completed... so "Rise of Flight" will be avenged (LoL).

- There will be more "Tank Crew" modules... provided that the community keeps showing interest in tanks.

- There will be more collector planes.

- There will be more collector vehicles.

- BUT... there won't be more modules after "Battle of Normandy"... because there will be the new core engine for that.

 

I guess, nevertheless, that there could be more modules after "Normandy", if serious delays happened during the development phase of the new core engine.

 

Anyway, following such statements from the devs, this is the future of "Great Battles": provided that the core engine under development is a success, at some point in the future "Great Battles" will be considered by 1CGS as a secondary game, same as "IL-2 1946" and "IL-2 Cliffs of Dover" are considered secondary in 1CGS's communication priorities.  Furthermore, since the official page stopped selling "Blitz" and "Tobruk", BOTH "IL-2 1946" and "IL-2 Cliffs of Dover" are simply absent from their communication priorities. There still will be a Daedalos team for "IL-2 1946", there still will be a Team Fusion team for "IL-2 Cliffs of Dover"... and there will be the equivalent team of fans, modders and skinners for "Great Battles": "three men and a dog" as some say. So please, no drama: "Great Battles" will be priority number one in the big bosses minds as long as their next core engine is not published, as long it doesn't prove to be successful (do you remember 2011?) and, especially, as long as it doesn't prove it's financially lucrative. So please, as I said, no drama, and no angst. In the big scheme of things, death is a natural process. It happened to the dinosaurs back in the late Cretaceous and it happens to flight sims today. So, sooner or later, plenty of "Great Battles" fanboys here in these forums will be happy to make fun of both "Cliffs of Dover" and "Great Battles" because they will be losing their minds with their new toy: "IL-2 Sturmovik 4".

 

 

[Enceladus828]

Quote

On Kuban I would have made the nose position in the A-20 from the get go. I always planned to make it, but then something always got in the way. Later on, I was faced with making the A-20 nose interior or having an opportunity to make the IAR-80/81. I chose the IAR and held out hope I could still do the A-20 nose eventually.

That's interesting to know that the navigator position on the A-20 was planned. I always thought that it was unnecessary due to bombardier position in this game being controlled by the pilot (similar to in CFS3). I'm glad Jason chose to make the IAR 80/81 over that position.

 

I do hope that there will be Romanian pilot voices when the plane is released or very shortly after.

 

Quote

Knowing how things turned out this year, I would have made an AI B-17 for Bodenplatte... Due to lack of internal resources, I reserved it for the next module where we could have built it inside the team or with our other Russian modeling partners.

A Sicily installment would be a great place to make an AI B-17 or a flyable B-25 or B-26. If Loft and Han still plan to do Sicily next, then I hope one of those 3 things will happen. If not but they do Sicily, then I hope the plane set is great and/or there are a lot of large ships... on average a heavy cruiser.

[LukeFF]

4 hours ago, =621=Samikatz said:

Hard to market a sim based entirely on the second-line aircraft without the most famous of all

 

Corsairs in Korea were second-line aircraft? The Marines would like a word with you. ?

[BlitzPig_EL]

Ground pounding with any of the late props on a Korean map would be fun, and very challenging because of the nature of the terrain.

 

Also the chance to bag another jet with a prop is something I relish.