Update 5.101 Discussion thread

[CUJO_1970]

23 hours ago, Jaws2002 said:

The first Spitfire I like. 

I don’t even know who you are anymore.

?

 

 

[jollyjack]

On 3/30/2023 at 7:07 PM, Strombrand said:

No mention of the Siemens-Schuckert D-IV at all. Am  I correct in assuming that this is no longer working? If so will those of us who preordered be refunded?

 

probably, they sold it to another retailer:

 

[Jaws2002]

3 minutes ago, CUJO_1970 said:

I don’t even know who you are anymore.

?

 

 

hahaha. Who are you and what have you done to Jaws.?

[Avimimus]

1 hour ago, CUJO_1970 said:

I don’t even know who you are anymore.

?

 

 

Admittedly, with its four panel canopy and unusually long nose - it is the Spitfire that most closely resembles an IAR 80/81 though.

[Zvyozdochka]

Sorry for asking this question. 
As far as I could find out, both Pilot's Note for Spitfire IX and XIV (A.P. 1565J, P & L-P.N. / A.P. 1565T & W-P.N. )said that the prop RPM lever can be used as a conventional prop RPM lever to enable the pilot to select higher RPM than those given by the interconnection control, and the max RPM was given by pushed the lever fully forward. But what we have in the game now is just something like a two-stage controler which only has two mode - auto or max. A fact is that, the given Engine mode "International power (up to 1 hour): 2600 RPM, boost +9" can never be achieved currently in the game because you could only get 2500RPM boost +9 or 2600RPM boost +10 with the interconnection in operation, and 2750RPM boost +9 when using max RPM.
So maybe this system is not correctly simulated in the game? Please let me know if I am wrong.

[LLv34_Temuri]

If I'm not mistaken, dropping paratroopers now gives out log entries with the parentid. @Han Thank you very much!

Edited March 31, 2023 by LLv34_Temuri

[Vishnu]

With all the plans currently and in the future to modify the FC maps, will Bodenplatte get a second look too? ?

[the_dudeWG]

Wow, great news - especially regarding Flying Circus III & additional content. One major complaint I have; why in the world would they include the Halberstadt D.II in FC3 over the Albatros D.III? It looks like FC3 will fill in so many gaps for 1917, but leave out the D.III?!? I would love to see the Pup in FC3 as well, but which aircraft do we replace it with? It's not as easy to answer on the Entente side.

 

Edited March 31, 2023 by the_dudeWG

[Jaegermeister]

On 3/30/2023 at 1:07 PM, Strombrand said:

No mention of the Siemens-Schuckert D-IV at all. Am  I correct in assuming that this is no longer working? If so will those of us who preordered be refunded?

 

You are incorrect in assuming that. It's just not part of this update.

 

On 3/30/2023 at 1:14 PM, Avimimus said:

 

I'm 99% sure that is an incorrect assumption. It appears the artwork has been in engine for over a month now and some of the coding is being done as well.

 

There is a general lack of coordination on the news front (maybe related to hesitancy with English translations or something)? We're often left with a lot of uncertainty these days when it isn't necessary. I suspect that they were just focussed on announcing FC.III, committing to some of the other aircraft (for FC3.5? Collector planes? FCIV? It isn't clear), didn't mention the floatplanes/seaplanes (perhaps because they haven't committed to building a WWI Channel map for them yet? Or at least not in the near future before the new map tech is out??) and simply forgot about mentioning the SSW.DIV in the midst of all of that.

 

Afterall, they've shown us screenshots of it in game... so they probably assume we know about it and don't need reassurance etc?

 

I don't think there is any hesitancy to release information due to language translations as various devs are perfectly fluent in English. I think the lack of confirmation or denial of random speculation is being misconstrued as lack of communication. The things that are being worked on and nearing completion are being announced in a timely fashion (in my opinion).

 

Regarding the other thoughts, all I know is that the Siemens-Schuckert D.IV is still being worked on. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 31, 2023 by Jaegermeister

[the_dudeWG]

5 hours ago, Avimimus said:

 

That and 1916 two seaters for the Halberstadt D.II, Eindecker III, and Airco DH.2 to shoot down.

Rise of Flight had the same problem. I always felt the game needed the B.E.2 and Albatros C.III above all else.

[flyboywannabe]

5 hours ago, LeftyHC said:

 

It does the same for me. The game freezes and when trying to restart it after closing it from Task Manager, it freezes again. Always needs rebooting my pc.

All good for me yesterday GOOD LUCK!

[Avimimus]

5 hours ago, Jaegermeister said:

I don't think there is any hesitancy to release information due to language translations as various devs are perfectly fluent in English. I think the lack of confirmation or denial of random speculation is being misconstrued as lack of communication. The things that are being worked on and nearing completion are being announced in a timely fashion (in my opinion).

 

You may now be right. I just - well, to put it simply - if I was dealing with a community that was so keen to speculate on the smallest statement (or even the smallest lack of a statement), then I might be even more cautious if it wasn't in my first language - even if I was relatively fluent. The community is sometimes a bit too enthusiastic I suspect! Which is a good thing overall I suppose.

[Avimimus]

15 hours ago, the_dudeWG said:

Rise of Flight had the same problem. I always felt the game needed the B.E.2 and Albatros C.III above all else.

 

Yes: Still trying to get it addressed after all these years (after-all, the earlies fighter aircraft were intended to intercept two seat reconnaissance aircraft - so they should have a target)!

 

I might suggest the  Albatros C.I over the Albatros C.III though. The simple reason is that the Albatros C.I could be caught by an Airco DH.2 (under favourable circumstances), whereas the C.III was getting too fast.

 

I think the ideal aircraft would be the Albatros C.I or the well armed (and equally numerous) LVG C.II! Even a 'b-series' aircraft with a field mod adding armament to it might work (most of that later 'b' types had transitional variants with armament)!

 

The goal is to find an interesting plane with about ~130-135 km/h airspeed (rather than 145-165 km/h).

Edited April 1, 2023 by Avimimus

[Talisman]

16 hours ago, Amicus_VoV said:

Sorry for asking this question. 
As far as I could find out, both Pilot's Note for Spitfire IX and XIV (A.P. 1565J, P & L-P.N. / A.P. 1565T & W-P.N. )said that the prop RPM lever can be used as a conventional prop RPM lever to enable the pilot to select higher RPM than those given by the interconnection control, and the max RPM was given by pushed the lever fully forward. But what we have in the game now is just something like a two-stage controler which only has two mode - auto or max. A fact is that, the given Engine mode "International power (up to 1 hour): 2600 RPM, boost +9" can never be achieved currently in the game because you could only get 2500RPM boost +9 or 2600RPM boost +10 with the interconnection in operation, and 2750RPM boost +9 when using max RPM.
So maybe this system is not correctly simulated in the game? Please let me know if I am wrong.

 

Yes, shame we can't get full manual control of the propeller pitch across the full range of rpm just like with the standard XIV.  We seem to have interconnection or MAX REVS, but nothing else as a choice; I would simply like to disconnect interconnection.  Therefore, for me, I have no use for the bubble top version and much prefer the standard XIV.

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

[Bert_Foster]

Simply need an AUTO/Man switch to allow normal non interconnected prop operation. Current mechanization is incorrect.

[FuriousMeow]

These pilot notes are slightly different and bring up some questions if it really allows full control of the prop rpm. Why would any position forward of the interconnect cause fuel usage to increase considerably no matter what? Also, how does it work pulling back from MAX RPM to the interconnect, wouldn't it reduce down to 1800RPM until it goes into the interconnect position then speed back up to match the throttle setting? Doesn't seem like that would be a good idea.

 

https://www.drivehq.com/file/df.aspx/publish/vvjack/wwwhome/spit14.pdf

 

  

[BlitzPig_EL]

Just encountered an issue.  Made some changes to a WW1 mission that I flew earlier in the day just fine.  Added new airfields for the 0/400 and Gotha further back from the front lines.  Saved the mission as normal, loaded game up to test it and got this message...

 

 

I get this when I try to fly from any of the fields on the map now.  Never seen this before.   Any ideas?

Edited April 2, 2023 by BlitzPig_EL

[Zvyozdochka]

8 hours ago, FuriousMeow said:

Why would any position forward of the interconnect cause fuel usage to increase considerably no matter what? Also, how does it work pulling back from MAX RPM to the interconnect, wouldn't it reduce down to 1800RPM until it goes into the interconnect position then speed back up to match the throttle setting?

I guess by pushing the lever forward, RPM just increase from the interconnected RPM (e.g. 2500rpm for boost +9 etc.) all the way to 2750RPM (which is the MAX. REVS.), so that's why the fuel consumption increased (because you run the engine at higher RPM). Not pretty sure about this, but it seems to be an answer.

 

17 hours ago, 56RAF_Talisman said:

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

Thank you for your reply Talisman!

Edited April 2, 2023 by Amicus_VoV

[jollyjack]

7 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Just encountered an issue.  Made some changes to a WW1 mission that I flew earlier in the day just fine.  Added new airfields for the 0/400 and Gotha further back from the front lines.  Saved the mission as normal, loaded game up to test it and got this message...

 

 

I get this when I try to fly from any of the fields on the map now.  Never seen this before.   Any ideas?

 

Never saw that, but you could try saving all selected stuff (Cntr-A)  in the ME exported as a group, then delete all, and re import this group.

 

PS the Western Front 1918 map has been updated, but exactly what? Sofar i did not find changes ....

Edited April 2, 2023 by jollyjack

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, jollyjack said:

PS the Western Front 1918 map has been updated, but exactly what? Sofar i did not find changes ....

 

It's described all right there in the release notes.

[BMA_FlyingShark]

1 hour ago, jollyjack said:

PS the Western Front 1918 map has been updated, but exactly what? Sofar i did not find changes ....

Spoiler

Western Front 1918 Map Changes

General fixes for the Western Front map, Spring 1918:

Leveled terrain under the Ochey airfield (2630-1);
Leveled terrain under the Pronville airfield (0908-5);
Restored objects on the airfield La Bellevue (0905-7);
Added airfield Marville (1726-5);
Changed the name of the airfield to Avesnes-le-Sec West (0811-1);
Removed a flooding from the Etain airfield (1927-2);
Fixed forest clearings (1327-4, 1427-8, 1328-2, 1325-3);
Removed the overlapping of buildings in the villages on the front line and trenches (1306-7, 1206-5, 0807-4, 0506-6, 0307-6, 0207-3, 2432-1, 2532-8);
Airfield Bernes (1209-4) - the sign has been removed from the hangar;
Train station Lille (0409-7) - removed the extra model of the station, mistakenly added to the map;
Airfields Stenay and Stenay South (1724-8) and Belrain (2425-7) have leveled terrain;
Added the city of Luxembourg (1531);
Added Fort Verdun (2025-6);
Many farms have been added to the countryside;
Ypres (0107-3) - added a canal near the city;
Bridge markings added (1421-3, 1425-4, 1425-3, 1426-2, 1426-3, 1427-1, 1427-8, 1428, 2831-6, 2831-9, 2832-8, 2832 -9, 2520-4, 2520-7, 2519-6, 2625, 0815-4, 0715-7, 0815-8, 0314-5, 0214-3, 0507-4, 0611-5);
Added missing ground textures near buildings (1203-5, 1203-6, 1203-8, 1406-1, 1306-4, 1310-9, 1103-5, 1105-9, 0910-4, 0911-1, 1523-5 , 1425-1, 0806-9, 1621-1, 1721-9, 1624-4, 1624-1, 1627-2, 1820-9, 1820-2, 1921-9, 2027-8, 2028-4, 2029 -5, 2029-3, 0607-5, 0505-2, 2128-5, 0402-3, 2229-8, 2229-1, 2230-5, 2231-9, 2230-5, 2431-2);
Corrected forest clearings (1327-4, 1427-8, 1328-2, 1328-5, 1325-3);
Removed trees from houses 0506-4, 0508-7, 0508-3, 0510-7, 0610-2, 0610-8, 0608-7, 0608-7, 0606-5, 0605-8, 0605-9, 0606-7, 0608- 3, 0609-1, 0508-7, 1207-1);
Added missing textures for railways (1307-3, 0203-3, 0605-9, 0605-8);
Toul airfield (2629-8) - the terrain at the end of the runway has been leveled.

 

Have a nice day.

 

[CountZero]

12 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Just encountered an issue.  Made some changes to a WW1 mission that I flew earlier in the day just fine.  Added new airfields for the 0/400 and Gotha further back from the front lines.  Saved the mission as normal, loaded game up to test it and got this message...

 

 

I get this when I try to fly from any of the fields on the map now.  Never seen this before.   Any ideas?

Only time i encounter that type of message was in MP when while i was in selection of airplane and its modifications, someoe els took the last airplane and no more are left on spawn base.

[Canvas25]

5 hours ago, jollyjack said:

 

Never saw that, but you could try saving all selected stuff (Cntr-A)  in the ME exported as a group, then delete all, and re import this group.

 

PS the Western Front 1918 map has been updated, but exactly what? Sofar i did not find changes ....

 

Even just having the farms dotted around the landscape makes a big visual difference.

[ScotsmanFlyingscotsman]

On 3/31/2023 at 9:33 PM, Amicus_VoV said:

Sorry for asking this question. 
As far as I could find out, both Pilot's Note for Spitfire IX and XIV (A.P. 1565J, P & L-P.N. / A.P. 1565T & W-P.N. )said that the prop RPM lever can be used as a conventional prop RPM lever to enable the pilot to select higher RPM than those given by the interconnection control, and the max RPM was given by pushed the lever fully forward. But what we have in the game now is just something like a two-stage controler which only has two mode - auto or max. A fact is that, the given Engine mode "International power (up to 1 hour): 2600 RPM, boost +9" can never be achieved currently in the game because you could only get 2500RPM boost +9 or 2600RPM boost +10 with the interconnection in operation, and 2750RPM boost +9 when using max RPM.
So maybe this system is not correctly simulated in the game? Please let me know if I am wrong.

 

Thanks for bringing this up, I miss having the RPM tied to another axis, I was dogfighting 2 x Me-110G's at 3000m, The Spit really struggled and I hardly got to 300mph, So your not the only one struggling to use the Spitfire. Lets hope they can find a 'fix' if possible

[J99_Sizzlorr]

As much as I like the news of FC3 and FC4 getting developed, I am not on board with the fact that the Albatros D.III and the Pup will be part of FC4. Those are major 1917 planes and urgently needed to flesh out 1917 online scenarios as well as the career mode. I think it is a mistake to make us wait that long before we can truly experience other time periods wihtout substitutes for major planes which I personally don't like. I think the Halberstadt D.II and the F.E.2b could swap places with them. They are better matched against the planned FC4 planes.

[IRRE_Axurit]

Good morning Thanks for this update.

But since this update I have to go through steam VR. I played with openXR, and the game worked fine, and as soon as I updated, it was broken.

Did you change anything about this?

[JG4_Widukind]

Me410 AA Engine break after 14-15min Combat fly (it should 30min!)

 

Standart Engine go to emergency Power after 14-16 min and than breaks! Same for AA Engine !

Edited April 3, 2023 by JG4_Widukind

[CSW_Hot_Dog]

On 3/30/2023 at 1:22 AM, LukeFF said:

On 3/30/2023 at 12:40 AM, =WoVi=TigrisJK said:

Isn't the XIVe supposed to have an extra fuel tank with 64-gals worth of extra fuel? Quick mission shows it topping off at 505 L like the original.

 

It was only fitted on special occasions when fitted as a photo-recon plane.

 

There was said in anouncement, that this extra tank will be available, but now this sentence quietly without explanation dissapeared!

 

Google stiill can find it: "An additional 64-gallon fuel tank was also fitted in the rear fuselage, which increased the range of the Mk. XIV to over 610 miles on internal ..." 

 

But on the Il-2 website, there is no any more... So promises, promises, promises, promises and then do it like it was never said! Typical!

Edited April 3, 2023 by CSW_Hot_Dog

[CountZero]

1 hour ago, JG4_Widukind said:

Me410 AA Engine break after 14-15min Combat fly (it should 30min!)

 

Standart Engine go to emergency Power after 14-16 min and than breaks! Same for AA Engine !

What % you use?

 

combat techchat icon should not be trusted as it dont turn to emergancy when you go abow 2500rpm or 1.3ata, so insted helping player it tricks it to think hes in safe combat timer, but hes in emergancy already, if i use 72% gauges show 1.3 and 2500rpm and it lasted ~30min , but if i belive techchat combat icon and use 83% it lasts half of it.

 

Combat power (up to 30 minutes): 2500 RPM, 1.3 ata 

1 hour ago, CSW_Hot_Dog said:

 

There was said in anouncement, that this extra tank will be available, but now this sentence quietly without explanation dissapeared!

 

Google stiill can find it: "An additional 64-gallon fuel tank was also fitted in the rear fuselage, which increased the range of the Mk. XIV to over 610 miles on internal ..." 

 

But on the Il-2 website, there is no any more... So promises, promises, promises, promises and then do it like it was never said! Typical!

Its in airplane but its empty ? 

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Devs consider swapping Albatross DIII and Spowitch Pup  to be released in next FC volume. It will make single player folks happy to have consisted career mode and have essential planes in  multiplayer community event - The bloody April in 2024 .

[Fafnir_6]

7 hours ago, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

Devs consider swapping Albatross DIII and Spowitch Pup  to be released in next FC volume. It will make single player folks happy to have consisted career mode and have essential planes in  multiplayer community event - The bloody April in 2024 .

 

I wondered about the planeset for Volume III as well.   Having the Albatros D.III and Pup in volume III makes sense from a consistency standpoint.  Upon further reflection, I think it was a marketing decision.  I think that that the early war stuff was always a slower seller in the RoF days, since the MP crowd is unlikely to go for an older, slower set of aircraft.  This is also the reason we never got adequate 1916 2-seaters (aside from the glorious Roland C.II), such as the B.E.2c, Albatros C.I or Farman F40.  I think they decided to hold back the Albatros D.III and Pup to help cushion Volume IV sales.  I'm buying both.  I would have been happier with the consistent planesets but in the end I'll get everything anyway and I understand why they did it this way.

 

I really hope sales for FC are good because then there might be a desire on the part of the devs to do a proper Battle of Tarnopol module (using the map from RoF):

Russian Empire:
Ilya Mourometz
Sikorsky S.16
Nieuport N.17 DUX
Morane L
Caudron G4 or Lebed 12

 

Austro-Hungary/German Empire:
Hansa-Brandenburg C.I (could do several series)
Hansa-Brandenburg D.I
Oeffag D.II or D.III (could do a couple of series)
Albatros C.III
Rumpler C.I or Lloyd C.V

 

Cheers,

 

Fafnir_6

Edited April 4, 2023 by Fafnir_6

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

1 hour ago, Fafnir_6 said:

 

I wondered about the planeset for Volume III as well.   Having the Albatros D.III and Pup in volume III makes sense from a consistency standpoint.  Upon further reflection, I think it was a marketing decision.  I think that that the early war stuff was always a slower seller in the RoF days, since the MP crowd is unlikely to go for an older, slower set of aircraft.  

I don't know about that, all guys who i know and seeing in multiplayer had bought all planes, one reason is to support genre, second are the mission which are created to reproduce different years on the front. When most populated time are Sunday evenings, no one would  like to skip the usually playtime because one don't have old planes in the hangar. Besides ppl get bored flying only one type, they want try flying something different than 1918 plane set. I enjoy flying Camel but also Spowitch Pup, majority think the same about older crates. This goes from scouts to two seaters. Flying those old scouts planes is fun, it would be great if we have also more old two seaters which you listed. Scouts need to have something to chase and catch up and be able to stay with during escort route to mission objective.

Edited April 4, 2023 by 1PL-Husar-1Esk

[JG4_Widukind]

12 hours ago, CountZero said:

What % you use?

 

combat techchat icon should not be trusted as it dont turn to emergancy when you go abow 2500rpm or 1.3ata, so insted helping player it tricks it to think hes in safe combat timer, but hes in emergancy already, if i use 72% gauges show 1.3 and 2500rpm and it lasted ~30min , but if i belive techchat combat icon and use 83% it lasts half of it.

 

Combat power (up to 30 minutes): 2500 RPM, 1.3 ata 

Its in airplane but its empty ? 

 

No i fly with instruments not with technochat 1.3 with 2500rpm(14 min) Have u it testet CountZero its with both engines?

[ST_Catchov]

1 hour ago, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

I enjoy flying Camel but also Spowitch Pup, majority think the same about older crates. This goes from scouts to two seaters. Flying those old scouts planes is fun, it would be great if we have also more old two seaters which you listed.

 

Yep you are right. I love the old birds. Particularly the Spowitch Pup. I'm in the majority and in agreeance with what you say. Bring it on devs. C'mon!

[Letka_13/Arrow_]

I must say that in a career mission yesterday, for the first time I saw enemy fighters disengage. It was an armed recon mission in a Typhoon. During our return we were intercepted by four FW-190As, as we were out of altitude and low on fuel, I continued at full throttle near the ground. The first miracle was that my flight stayed with me (four aircraft). Fockewulfs followed, so I expected that this will continue until we are over our own airfield in Britain. However when I was some 10 miles from the French coastline, suddenly the enemy aircraft pulled up and disengaged. I landed with less than 5 gallons of fuel in my tanks. I hope that this was not just a single behavior but the new patch brought us some disengage logic for enemy aircraft, which would be most desirable. 

Edited April 4, 2023 by Rudolph

[KevPBur]

1 hour ago, Rudolph said:

I must say that in a career mission yesterday, for the first time I saw enemy fighters disengage. It was an armed recon mission in a Typhoon. During our return we were intercepted by four FW-190As, as we were out of altitude and low on fuel, I continued at full throttle near the ground. The first miracle was that my flight stayed with me (four aircraft). Fockewulfs followed, so I expected that this will continue until we are over our own airfield in Britain. However when I was some 10 miles from the French coastline, suddenly the enemy aircraft pulled up and disengaged. I landed with less than 5 gallons of fuel in my tanks. I hope that this was not just a single behavior but the new patch brought us some disengage logic for enemy aircraft, which would be most desirable. 

 

I have been seeing this since the Normandy map was released in both Spitfire MkIX and Mustang careers. The Germans don't like getting their feet wet.

I have had an occassional fighter appear as we enter the circuit but never more than 2 and I think this is to reflect real events as it is mentioned in the unit history in the career.

 

I don't know if anything has changed in the last release but on other maps as long as you don't fly straight and level and slower than the persuers they will eventually beak off. I think turning back into them a couple of times let's them know you know they are there and they can't just shadow you home. On Stallingrad, for instance, that is a documented tactic of the Luftwaffe as airfields were so close to the front.

That said, it is a real pain when it happens. I have more recently been able to locate an occassional friendly flight that are willing to engage your shadow so you can then either turn and join in the fight or use the oppotunity to make a run for it when out of fuel or ammo.

As for keeping the flight in line, keep issuing the "return to mission" and one of the formation types can keep them in line!

 

[BMA_West]

6 hours ago, ST_Catchov said:

 

Yep you are right. I love the old birds. Particularly the Spowitch Pup. I'm in the majority and in agreeance with what you say. Bring it on devs. C'mon!

 

Ohhh man, I loved that bird coming to the game in 2010 and finding myself able to handle it nicely with a twiststick which was not at all the case for the a camel, needed pedals to break in that one )))
Glad with the Hanriot HD.1 to !!!

Edited April 4, 2023 by West

[CountZero]

9 hours ago, JG4_Widukind said:

 

No i fly with instruments not with technochat 1.3 with 2500rpm(14 min) Have u it testet CountZero its with both engines?

I tested with default engine, and used 71% for lasting 30min, and when i used 82% it lasted 15min. But to me this looks like 2600rpm and 1.35ata, and thats why it lasted 15min. Thats why i ask what % do you see on techchat in your test. If engine have emergancy timer of 1min, and combat of 30min, if you go abow 1.3ata or 2500rpm, it will drain it mutch faster then expected . 

[JG1_Butzzell]

FC III   should include the Roland Cl.II  .

[BMA_FlyingShark]

1 minute ago, JG1_Butzzell said:

FC III   should include the Roland Cl.II  .

It will be part of the additional set that comes after FC III.

 

Have a nice day.