Pacific WW2 sim - COMBAT PILOT

[Gambit21]

5 hours ago, FTC_Burdokva said:

I truly don't understand why some people are concerned or negative. 

Which thread are you reading? 
 

[Rjel]

I completely missed this news. Best of luck Jason and team. Very exciting announcement. 

[Regingrave-]

16 часов назад, [CPT]Crunch сказал:

The programming side should be faster than ever, the computer itself can do most of the grunt and grind these days, like a self licking ice cream cone.  What's the hardest part is setting up the vision and foundation

Unfortunately, no. Programming and finding competent specialists in the area is still the bottleneck for the genre, and it's getting worse with every year. Graphical content is not cheap either, but artists in general are widely available.

[Hartsblade]

On 5/19/2023 at 3:48 PM, dburne said:

Can you imagine what it would be like if IL-2 was also planning the PTO as well. All these years without then to have two quality combat flight sims offering it would be incredible.

Don. Don't forget that DCS is creeping it's way toward the Pacific as well...imagine 3 PTO options!

[Guest deleted@83466]

On 5/20/2023 at 10:59 AM, BraveSirRobin said:

By the time they get to Iwo many of us will be dead.

Jason and his people have already anticipated this.  The new Combat Pilot forum already has an active “In Loving Memory” thread!

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, SeaSerpent said:

Jason and his people have already anticipated this.  The new Combat Pilot forum already has an active “In Loving Memory” thread!

I think there will be 2 threads.

1. In Memoriam

2. Good F$%#*’@ Riddance.

 

 

 

 

[Cloyd]

There could be lots of overlap in those two threads. ?

[=SqSq=SignorMagnifico]

They also already have a “DD today?”thread that’s already three pages long, but no DDs have been released, yet. Some things never change. https://forum.combatpilot.com/topic/88-dd-today/

[Trooper117]

1 hour ago, =SqSq=SignorMagnifico said:

They also already have a “DD today?”thread that’s already three pages long, but no DDs have been released, yet.

 

And?... people are happy and enthusiastic about a theatre they have been waiting for for a very long time.

Plus the majority of people who have joined the forum are well known names from this community here... it seems logical the DD thread would be started.

[Robli]

1 hour ago, =SqSq=SignorMagnifico said:

They also already have a “DD today?”thread that’s already three pages long, but no DDs have been released, yet. Some things never change. https://forum.combatpilot.com/topic/88-dd-today/

 

"DD today?" thread on il2sturmovik forum is 341 pages long. It used to be the thread, where people had some light-hearted fun and positive hype about their hobby, before it turned into a more bitter thread at the end, due to the disappointment that came from the lack of communication from the devs. It is only natural that people want that old time fun and positive vibes back, so this thread was created on combat pilot forum. 

[Denum]

On 5/22/2023 at 3:52 AM, Regingrave said:

Unfortunately, no. Programming and finding competent specialists in the area is still the bottleneck for the genre, and it's getting worse with every year. Graphical content is not cheap either, but artists in general are widely available.

 

For the programming is it aerospace related or just programming in general it's difficult to find people for? 

 

Seems like every kid out of school here wants to go into computers. 

 

Trying to find plumbing apprentices is far harder then I ever expected. It's not a super difficult job and pays really well! 

[Gambit21]

12 minutes ago, Denum said:

 

For the programming is it aerospace related or just programming in general it's difficult to find people for? 

 

Seems like every kid out of school here wants to go into computers. 

 

Trying to find plumbing apprentices is far harder then I ever expected. It's not a super difficult job and pays really well! 

It’s just going to get worse.

 

Oops …sorry Luke!

 

 

[Amiral_Crapaud]

8 hours ago, Denum said:

 

For the programming is it aerospace related or just programming in general it's difficult to find people for? 

 

Seems like every kid out of school here wants to go into computers. 

 

Trying to find plumbing apprentices is far harder then I ever expected. It's not a super difficult job and pays really well! 

 

To be completely honest, it's not just about being proficient in programming - coding is only half the skillset needed for a fluid production pipeline. It's equally important to possess a deep understanding of the subject matter you're working on. I'm fortunate to have a team for our little carrier game consisting of a skilled programmer who has made games about combat aircraft, a professional 2D artist who draws covers for our own local French aeronautics monthly, and an exceptional 3D artist who knows his Hiei from his Kirishima. They are not only well-versed in their respective fields but also possess the ability to independently explore additional resources, make educated assumptions that align with my expectations, and gather relevant references beyond what we already have at our disposal.

 

As someone with a full-time job, it brings me great joy and relief not to have to constantly guide them as if I were directing a SACLOS system to hit a target. They operate on a "Fire & Forget" principle—we agree on what they need, and when I return, they have already completed the task as expected, if not better.

 

This level of expertise is truly invaluable. The difference between assigning small tasks and constantly monitoring someone's progress, versus having complete confidence in their vision and skills, is immeasurable. It's like night and day and turns dreams into realities - or, if you just don't find the right people for the right task, possibly into nightmares.

[danielprates]

17 hours ago, Amiral_Crapaud said:

 

To be completely honest, it's not just about being proficient in programming - coding is only half the skillset needed for a fluid production pipeline. It's equally important to possess a deep understanding of the subject matter you're working on. I'm fortunate to have a team for our little carrier game consisting of a skilled programmer who has made games about combat aircraft, a professional 2D artist who draws covers for our own local French aeronautics monthly, and an exceptional 3D artist who knows his Hiei from his Kirishima. They are not only well-versed in their respective fields but also possess the ability to independently explore additional resources, make educated assumptions that align with my expectations, and gather relevant references beyond what we already have at our disposal.

 

As someone with a full-time job, it brings me great joy and relief not to have to constantly guide them as if I were directing a SACLOS system to hit a target. They operate on a "Fire & Forget" principle—we agree on what they need, and when I return, they have already completed the task as expected, if not better.

 

This level of expertise is truly invaluable. The difference between assigning small tasks and constantly monitoring someone's progress, versus having complete confidence in their vision and skills, is immeasurable. It's like night and day and turns dreams into realities - or, if you just don't find the right people for the right task, possibly into nightmares.

 

Maybe combat pilot could lease (edit: license) TF:A's world building and 3d models and save itself a few year's worth of development.

Edited May 25, 2023 by danielprates

[BraveSirRobin]

2 hours ago, danielprates said:

 

Maybe combat pilot could lease (edit: license) TF:A's world building and 3d models and save itself a few year's worth of development.

What is TF:A?

[Gambit21]

1 minute ago, BraveSirRobin said:

What is TF:A?

 

 Task Force Admiral

 

[BraveSirRobin]

42 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

 

 Task Force Admiral

 

Isn’t that the same company?  I just assumed that they’d be using a lot of that tech?

[danielprates]

15 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

Isn’t that the same company?  I just assumed that they’d be using a lot of that tech?

 

No.

[BraveSirRobin]

3 minutes ago, danielprates said:

 

No.

Ok, I went back and read the intro article again.  It’s the company the developed “Call to Arms”.  I assume they’ll be using a lot of that tech.

[danielprates]

Just now, BraveSirRobin said:

Ok, I went back and read the intro article again.  It’s the company the developed “Call to Arms”.  I assume they’ll be using a lot of that tech.

 

Oh I sure hope so. Call to arms looks good and world+3d models taken from it would be nice. Can it be done though? I understand little about software developent; it seeks kinda intuitive that FM, DM etc, and terrain/models, are independent things, but then again I wouldnt be surprised if it turned out not to be so easy. 

 

 

[BraveSirRobin]

58 minutes ago, danielprates said:

 

Oh I sure hope so. Call to arms looks good and world+3d models taken from it would be nice. Can it be done though? I understand little about software developent; it seeks kinda intuitive that FM, DM etc, and terrain/models, are independent things, but then again I wouldnt be surprised if it turned out not to be so easy. 

 

 

None of it will be easy.  And it may not be doable.  Only the programmers who are involved will be able to determine that.  But it’s definitely easier to use code that you own and are familiar with than trying to use someone else’s code.  

[Amiral_Crapaud]

5 hours ago, danielprates said:

 

Maybe combat pilot could lease (edit: license) TF:A's world building and 3d models and save itself a few year's worth of development.

It doesn't really work for the world building part Daniel - among other things also because the graphics allowed by our engine, while pretty by wargaming standards, are not currently at a point where they'd be a fit for the needs of a next gen (or even obviously a current gen if we want to include Il-2 & DCS). The engine itself is developed along as we go so as to provide us with the contents we need for our naval-centric strategy game, and would be ill-adapted for anything else at that point without an amount of work that is better spent on a commercial solution for whoever would not be us.

 

3D models are entirely something else, but as said in another topic, it's not completely up to us! ^^

Cheers

[danielprates]

1 hour ago, Amiral_Crapaud said:

It doesn't really work for the world building part Daniel - among other things also because the graphics allowed by our engine, while pretty by wargaming standards, are not currently at a point where they'd be a fit for the needs of a next gen (or even obviously a current gen if we want to include Il-2 & DCS). The engine itself is developed along as we go so as to provide us with the contents we need for our naval-centric strategy game, and would be ill-adapted for anything else at that point without an amount of work that is better spent on a commercial solution for whoever would not be us.

 

3D models are entirely something else, but as said in another topic, it's not completely up to us! ^^

Cheers

 

Ach, too bad. 

[RossMarBow]

On 5/25/2023 at 5:23 AM, Denum said:

 

For the programming is it aerospace related or just programming in general it's difficult to find people for? 

 

Seems like every kid out of school here wants to go into computers. 

 

Trying to find plumbing apprentices is far harder then I ever expected. It's not a super difficult job and pays really well! 

Yea but how many kids want to code ww2 plane combat?

3 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said:

None of it will be easy.  And it may not be doable.  Only the programmers who are involved will be able to determine that.  But it’s definitely easier to use code that you own and are familiar with than trying to use someone else’s code.  

also this 

people seem to think you can just copy paste code 

building something from scratch takes about as long as trying to understand existing code

every single game I know that uses very old code runs into massive issues with trying to understand the old code

[Lusekofte]

I have no idea how far they come in development of the game engine, or choosing what to use. I suspect not far or not started yet. 
we will fight over water, in msfs the water is about 10 cm deep. You can land a chopper in it. 
We are going sub hunting, sink ships and crash in it or worse ditch with a slowly sinking plane trying to get out. 
I wonder if these must haves can be done in existing game engines with todays standard and demands

[AnPetrovich]

24 minutes ago, Lusekofte said:

we will fight over water, in msfs the water is about 10 cm deep. You can land a chopper in it. 

 

Well, we just started digging the bottom of the oceans in MSFS, and you know, water covers more than 70% of the planet's surface, thus, there is a lot of work ahead. Probably we'll make water a bit deeper when the Combat Pilot come.

[Denum]

On 5/24/2023 at 8:10 PM, Amiral_Crapaud said:

if you just don't find the right people for the right task, possibly into nightmares.

 

This I can fully sympathies with. The houses I do are usually in the 7 figure territory so small mistakes are just... Painfully expensive. 

 

When you describe it like that, there's really only a handful of people out there that would fit that category. It's even smaller if you need a self starter. 

 

Truthfully the idea is a bit daunting when you factor in the fact simulators are getting to be few and far between, with a player base that feels smaller everyday. I'm hoping that turns around because it's a ton of fun.

 

[Amiral_Crapaud]

16 hours ago, Denum said:

 

This I can fully sympathies with. The houses I do are usually in the 7 figure territory so small mistakes are just... Painfully expensive. 

 

When you describe it like that, there's really only a handful of people out there that would fit that category. It's even smaller if you need a self starter.

 

 

Aye!

Well to be honest, it's only one way among many others to make a game, obviously - it's the way that works with a management that would be hands-off from the start with its dev & creative team, and scattered all around the place. We're a certain number of smaller indie teams (that i wouldn't go as far as calling studios, including for the reasons to follow) whose members used to work apart from each other before COVID - and still do after. In a situation like that, you can't be expected to walk next door & tell something to your devs or your artists. It needs to be hands-off by definition, otherwise you're going into a wall at supersonic speed. Then, it's all about the skill of your people of course, but also your willingness to properly prepare in advance what is part of your job & your ability to express your thoughts, two aspects on which I had to learn by doing in regard of game design. In this case, most other devs, if not all other devs apart from the one I have, would perhaps have lost focus, hope or patience at some point in the past due to my own limitations. He did not. He is not just the man for the job, he is also the right person for me to work with.

 

So, we're scattered across 2 continents, and many more time zones if you start to take into account other helpers. When you're in this situation, no half-butt approach will work. You need to find a balanced modus operandi that fits your guys so as to feed your work pipeline in a timely manner, and for that you want autonomous people who know from the get-go what they're talking/coding/painting/modeling about, for whom it's just not another job after a FPS and before a MMO.

 

On the other hand, that latter kind of personnel (that is, that doesn't need to be a WW2 buff to make a WW2 game) can actually work very well under other circumstances. You don't need expert ships & planes nerds at all levels if you have everybody working with a team dynamic, anchored within the same workspace. When I paid a visit to Oleg long ago, some months before legacy Il-2 was released, his office in Moscow was just the usual way a studio can work - him next door, the guys in a large open space, and other chaps working for or with ED on Flanker 2 right there in the next space. You imagine the concentration of talent you had in a few hundred square meters, and the kind of history they were about to write for our genre? Yet I wonder if many of them, besides the ED team, had that much experience making air combat simulations to begin with. I suppose they just had the right stuff & the right leaders to guide them, at the right time, with the right tools too.

 

Everything can work, yet you need the right amount of all the ingredients to bring your creation to life - and for that, there are many formulas out there, it's not a one size fits-em-all thing.

 

Only my 2cts of course. But so far so good in here, fingers crossed for the next stage.

[CountZero]

well ...welll ...well, zero vs wildcat and carriers for first PTO game, navy aviation, its only logical option to start with. But Burma, China, Manchuria, Solomons, New Guinea...  in the end its simple, famous battle name, famous navy airplanes, keep it simple for start is way to go.

 

Its like if some dev team decides to do korea and dont start with F-86 and MiG-15s, make it prop based insted jets vs jets focus ?

 

Edited June 2, 2023 by CountZero

[Gambit21]

You just wait.

[Dogbert1953]

On 5/19/2023 at 12:25 AM, Vamandrac said:

 

I do not think it all hinges on the multiplayer element at all because there are many out there looking for a robust single-player experience as well.

 

Completely agree, i couldn't give a toss about MP in any game.

[CUJO_1970]

On 5/26/2023 at 7:42 AM, AnPetrovich said:

 

Well, we just started digging the bottom of the oceans in MSFS, and you know, water covers more than 70% of the planet's surface, thus, there is a lot of work ahead. Probably we'll make water a bit deeper when the Combat Pilot come.

MSFS: Silent Hunter confirmed!

[Denum]

On 6/17/2023 at 10:35 AM, Dogbert1953 said:

 

Completely agree, i couldn't give a toss about MP in any game.

 

 

Yeah, it's actually in a games best interest to "give a toss" about multiplayer. Catering only to single player is a extremely small market these days. 

 

War thunder currently has 78,000 players online. iL2 is lucky to fill 3 servers and I'd be really surprised if there was even 7800 online right now. 

 

 

[Boogdud]

23 hours ago, Denum said:

War thunder currently has 78,000 players online

Multiplayer isn't the only reason that War Thunder is successful, it's successful because it's a ""free to play"" arcade game with a tiny learning curve and easy entry. People that play War Thunder aren't in it for the simulation or a historically accurate experience, they want an easily accessible arcade experience. I would hope Combat Pilot is going in a very different direction.

Edited June 29, 2023 by Boogdud

[RossMarBow]

On 6/29/2023 at 8:16 AM, Denum said:

 

 

Yeah, it's actually in a games best interest to "give a toss" about multiplayer. Catering only to single player is a extremely small market these days. 

 

War thunder currently has 78,000 players online. iL2 is lucky to fill 3 servers and I'd be really surprised if there was even 7800 online right now. 

 

 

I tried out WT and DCS

 

Problem with WT is it spreads its players too thin in arcade and realistic for my liking - not enough action because theirs not enough players on a map and the time limits too short
and simulator mode is has less players than IL-2

DCS has a few more players that IL-2, but Enigmas server is barely half full at peak, DCS can't even handle a full server, and the only other server I had interest in was events only
 

So IL-2 in terms of players I can shoot at or be shot by - wins easily as last time I checked we still fill two servers during NA prime time

I'm hoping that PTO gets more interest from players in the Asia region - as its currently IL-2's dead time, and I'm in the middle of the Pacific

[Lusekofte]

I probably eventually go public server on Gb again. I like flying big and slow. And the Arado and Mossie 

Latter you got a chance of reaching target.  
I simply dislike the unsophisticated dm. Both for engine, pilot sensitivity and engine in Gb. 
Rest is just great with a few exceptions. 
DCS is another story, it excell from golden diamond with platina to a stinking pile of crap , depending on how you look at it. 
Frustration level at highest peak to euphorically happiness.  
Same with msfs and clod. 
I really like GB to keep it’s simplicity but with a more complex dm 

[RossMarBow]

I agree I think GB could do with a more detailed engine DM 
That also got rid of the silly arbitrary timers

 

But I don't really see how DCS or WT 
esp WT do DM better

 

DCS dm, at least in cold war is your either exploded or ok
The lack of any in-between was a major let down
every time I took off in my sabre I primed my emergency fuel system but the primary system never failed without my plane turning into a crude fireball
and I always thought jets would be far more vulnerable to flak 
If you look at Renzics crash compilations DCS looks like 90s technology in comparison with GB

 

I don't really have any experience in WT with jets, only ww2 era
But its DM feels like a pretend DM
it shows all your individual bullets hitting the cutout, but the end result feels more like you're shooting a health bar
 

[Lusekofte]

Well I did not go into detail about dm in DCS

My experience is mostly on choppers. 
And despite what we see in real life choppers are hard to get down except the one you sit on. You get warnings about fire and better take it serious and land 

To me dm in DCs is not complex considering the complexity to get the engine started and all that. It is so much to say that it get boring

[Art-J]

@RossMarBow Keep in mind only WWII birds developed by ED have detailed internal DM in DCS. All other aircraft do indeed have very simplified, big hitbox-based DM a'la 1990s, sufficient for missile combat, but not so much for guns combat. Maybe the latest 3rd party jets are somewhere inbetween, I don't own any of them to comment.

 

But we're getting offtopic anyway.

Edited June 30, 2023 by Art-J

[Denum]

On 6/29/2023 at 12:16 PM, Boogdud said:

Multiplayer isn't the only reason that War Thunder is successful, it's successful because it's a ""free to play"" arcade game with a tiny learning curve and easy entry. People that play War Thunder aren't in it for the simulation or a historically accurate experience, they want an easily accessible arcade experience. I would hope Combat Pilot is going in a very different direction.

 

Combat pilot will obviously not be warthunder style. But what hinders iL2 is the insane level of difficulty to get a server up and running. What the combat box and fvp admins do is simply phenomenal with that they have. 

 

There's no option to even really attempt more arcade style gameplay for new players looking to try a bit prior to dumping money into a simulator kit. So they're missing out on tens of thousands of potential players because the gap in accessible gameplay is so big.