Developer blog #349: career mode updates, next Flying Circus planes, Lavochkin La-5F progress report

[Juri_JS]

21 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

The air forces of the two sides were nowhere close to being equal during the Ardennes and Rhineland campaigns. A typical comment one reads in RAF mission reports from the time is "Do the Germans still have an air force?" It's page after page after page of reports saying "nothing to report." On the German side, even before Bodenplatte, these guys were getting hacked to pieces any time they ran into Allied fighters - and often you read of German fighters turning away before engaging, because the few remaining veteran leaders of these formations knew they stood little chance of making it out alive (largely because the formations were filled with rookies who had no business being at the front lines).

 

I see someone else already commented on Clostermann, so I'll stop here. ?

The situation regarding number of aircraft in late war Luftwaffe missions in the west is a little more complicated. Beginning in Normandy it was realized that using Staffel sized formations in tactical fighter missions was ineffective because of Allied numerical superiority and declining pilot skills.
When the fuel situation allowed, important missions were instead often flown by whole Gruppen or sometimes Gefechtsverbände where formed consisting of several Gruppen. For examples I suggest to look in the combat diary of JG 26.

Of course such large formations were rarely at full strength because of losses. Smaller formations were usually employed in less important missions, like armed recon or anti spotter aircraft missions. Staffel or Schwarm sized missions once again became the norm when the fuel situation worsened, which was especially the case after February 1945.

The result of this situation was that Allied pilots would often fly missions without encountering any German fighters. When fighters were encountered, Allied pilots not always had a numerical advantage.

 

For career mode I would suggest to have once in a while a mission with higher numbers of German planes, except in the last 2-3 month of the war.

 

[Marcio]

37 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

USAAF fighters bases in the UK could offer hundreds of aircraft to escort the thousand bomber raids. Meanwhile the US 9th AF (not sure Clostermann realised it existed) was operating in hundreds 10 times on a daily basis.

 

His writing is fantasy. Read what the German pilots said. Their operational rate was appallingly low. There is a reason that the West was termed ‘the great fighter graveyard’. By Spring 1945 virtually nothing was left.

 

If he thinks that the Luftwaffe in 1945 had much ‘skillful’ about it, well…

 

He flew in sections of 4 - 8. When Luftwaffe fighters did sortie he may have felt outnumbered. That is not a view shared by other pilots and certainly is put into context by actual historical studies (which are a great read).

 

i really would drop him as a point of reference.

 

       Ok, but the missions carried out by the Tempests were very different in nature from those carried out by the US 8th and 9th AF.

 

       Interdiction of the railway network and "Rat Scramble" × Sweep and Bombers Escort. Different altitude ranges... anyway, this may have left a different impression...

[Marcio]

20 minutes ago, Juri_JS said:

The situation regarding number of aircraft in late war Luftwaffe missions in the west is a little more complicated. Beginning in Normandy it was realized that using Staffel sized formations in tactical fighter missions was ineffective because of Allied numerical superiority and declining pilot skills.
When the fuel situation allowed, important missions were instead often flown by whole Gruppen or sometimes Gefechtsverbände where formed consisting of several Gruppen. For examples I suggest to look in the combat diary of JG 26.

Of course such large formations were rarely at full strength because of losses. Smaller formations were usually employed in less important missions, like armed recon or anti spotter aircraft missions. Staffel or Schwarm sized missions once again became the norm when the fuel situation worsened, which was especially the case after February 1945.

The result of this situation was that Allied pilots would often fly missions without encountering any German fighters. When fighters were encountered, Allied pilots not always had a numerical advantage.

 

For career mode I would suggest to have once in a while a mission with higher numbers of German planes, except in the last 2-3 month of the war.

 

 

       Very well observed!

 

       I would also add that, it is quite possible, the situation would not have been so simple and homogeneous!

 

       I believe that the numerical balance of forces varied depending on the type, period (day/night) and altitude range in which the mission took place. The ratio between interceptor aircraft and flak should also vary according to the aforementioned parameters. And this all varied from period to period.

[EAF19_Marsh]

11 hours ago, Marcio said:

Ok, but the missions carried out by the Tempests were very different in nature from those carried out by the US 8th and 9th AF.

 

Interdiction of the railway network and "Rat Scramble" × Sweep and Bombers Escort. Different altitude ranges... anyway, this may have left a different impression...

‘Scrambles’ are 2 - 4 aircraft. Yep, you might be outnumbered should you encounter a Staffel or 2. That means the whole Allies air power in France and Belgium?

 

Dude, drop it and use some useful sources. The idea that the 1945 Luftwaffe could sortie sufficient force to ‘outnumber’ anyone except an unlucky few caught in the wrong place at the wrong time is risible.

 

As attested to by 95% of the primary, secondary and tertiary works on the subject.

[Ala13_UnopaUno_VR]

We needed b17, IA or Pilotable, no more refritos⛔?

Edited October 10, 2023 by Ala13_UnopaUno_VR

[EAF19_Marsh]

11 hours ago, Juri_JS said:

The situation regarding number of aircraft in late war Luftwaffe missions in the west is a little more complicated. Beginning in Normandy it was realized that using Staffel sized formations in tactical fighter missions was ineffective because of Allied numerical superiority and declining pilot skills.
When the fuel situation allowed, important missions were instead often flown by whole Gruppen or sometimes Gefechtsverbände where formed consisting of several Gruppen. For examples I suggest to look in the combat diary of JG 26.

Of course such large formations were rarely at full strength because of losses. Smaller formations were usually employed in less important missions, like armed recon or anti spotter aircraft missions. Staffel or Schwarm sized missions once again became the norm when the fuel situation worsened, which was especially the case after February 1945.

The result of this situation was that Allied pilots would often fly missions without encountering any German fighters. When fighters were encountered, Allied pilots not always had a numerical advantage.

 

For career mode I would suggest to have once in a while a mission with higher numbers of German planes, except in the last 2-3 month of the war.

 

Staffeln were the primary formation over Normandy. Read the studies on the subject. Or Knocke, if you don’t believe me.

“Gefechtsverbände” is a formation used exclusively for defence missions over Germany. It was never used over Normandy or the Rhein as that would have made zero sense.

 

People, give it up: you are wrong.

 

10 hours ago, Marcio said:

Very well observed!

No. Nothing personal, but the opinion delivered is factually incorrect. You may as well say the LSSAH had hundreds of Panthers at Prokhorovka. It might have been a frequently-repeated view, but it is wholly untrue.

[Juri_JS]

2 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

Staffeln were the primary formation over Normandy. Read the studies on the subject. Or Knocke, if you don’t believe me.

“Gefechtsverbände” is a formation used exclusively for defence missions over Germany. It was never used over Normandy or the Rhein as that would have made zero sense.

 

People, give it up: you are wrong.

Please read JG 26 combat diary and actual Luftwaffe mission reports. 

 

Just to give you two examples:

On 22 june III./JG26 flew a full strength anti fighter-bomber mission near Cherbourgh.

 

On 7 August 6 Fw-190 of I./JG26 and 18 Bf-109 of III./JG26 flew a large combined mission with elements of other JG's against American columns.

 

Of course many missions were flown by single Staffeln, but missions flown by 20-30 aircraft were far from uncommon.

 

And no, Gefechtsverbände were not limited to defence of Germany. The term was used when units of different Geschwader operated together under a single command. Do a search for Gefechtsverband Kuhlmey or Gefechtsverband Wilke.

 

Edited October 10, 2023 by Juri_JS

[EAF19_Marsh]

You have 2 examples. Of more than 12 aircraft. And we are discussing Allied air operations being ‘outnumbered’.

 

Wow.

 

I am busy. You look up multi-Gruppen battle flights and tell me where they occurred. I have several books to recommend you. Their data does not support your view.

 

Oh, and given the German fetish for calling anything more than 3 guys and a dog some kind of ‘battlegroup’, the fact that something has a name does not make it a strong formation.

[EAF19_Marsh]

I stopped over a coffee. “Gefechtsverband Kuhlmey” had 70 aircraft. In total. So, let’s say 8 aircraft per sortie? Max? I suspect 4 - 6

 

The VVS likely did not feel themselves ‘outnumbered’

 

Though you are correct that the term was used for a non-defense mission. I meant that the term and tactical use was essentially for the bomber-defense mission. As an actually flying unit, it never operated on this basis over the West.

[Juri_JS]

5 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

You have 2 examples. Of more than 12 aircraft. And we are discussing Allied air operations being ‘outnumbered’.

 

Wow.

 

I am busy. You look up multi-Gruppen battle flights and tell me where they occurred. I have several books to recommend you. Their data does not support your view.

 

Oh, and given the German fetish for calling anything more than 3 guys and a dog some kind of ‘battlegroup’, the fact that something has a name does not make it a strong formation.

Ok, how many examples do you need?

- On 23 August 1944 over 60 fighters of five different Jagdgeschwader met over Montdidier to fly a mission against Allied fighter-bombers.

 

- During Market Garden the following Gefechtsverbände were formed that regulary flew combinded missions, for example during the attacks on the Arnhem landing zones or the Nijmegen bridges:

 

Gefechtsverband Michalski:
Stab JG 4, I./JG 3, III./JG 300, III./JG 53, II./JG 77

 

Gefechstverband Specht:
Stab JG 11, II./JG 27, III./JG 4, I./JG 76

 

Gefechtsverband Späthe:
IV./JG 54, III./JG 11

 

- In early 1945 III./JG 54 regularly flew combined missions with JG 26.  For example on 14 February 1945 I./JG 26 and III./JG 54 flew a mission to defend the area of Rheine. Around 40 aircraft were involved in this mission.

 

The idea behind such combined missions was to achive temporary local numerical superiority. Sometimes it worked, like on a few occasions during Market Garden, other times it wasn't successful because the formations were attacked before they reached the target area or the Allies were able to send reinforcements.

Of course the Allied air forces were never outnumbered on the operational level in the west, but it did happen during a few missions, even late in the war, that's why I suggested to have a few missions with higher number of Luftwaffe fighters in career mode on rare occasions.

 

5 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

I stopped over a coffee. “Gefechtsverband Kuhlmey” had 70 aircraft. In total. So, let’s say 8 aircraft per sortie? Max? I suspect 4 - 6

That depended on the mission type and the units involved. It could be anything from 2 - 30 aircraft.

[I./JG52_Woutwocampe]

4 hours ago, Juri_JS said:

that's why I suggested to have a few missions with higher number of Luftwaffe fighters in career mode on rare occasions.

 

I hope so too. It would be annoying to ALWAYS be outnumbered 24 to 4.

 

We will see. 

[Trooper117]

6 minutes ago, I./JG52_Woutwocampe said:

I hope so too. It would be annoying to ALWAYS be outnumbered 24 to 4.

 

Just pretend you are Adolf Galland... I'm sure everything will turn out alright! ?

[LukeFF]

11 hours ago, Juri_JS said:

The situation regarding number of aircraft in late war Luftwaffe missions in the west is a little more complicated. Beginning in Normandy it was realized that using Staffel sized formations in tactical fighter missions was ineffective because of Allied numerical superiority and declining pilot skills.
When the fuel situation allowed, important missions were instead often flown by whole Gruppen or sometimes Gefechtsverbände where formed consisting of several Gruppen. For examples I suggest to look in the combat diary of JG 26.

Of course such large formations were rarely at full strength because of losses. Smaller formations were usually employed in less important missions, like armed recon or anti spotter aircraft missions. Staffel or Schwarm sized missions once again became the norm when the fuel situation worsened, which was especially the case after February 1945.

The result of this situation was that Allied pilots would often fly missions without encountering any German fighters. When fighters were encountered, Allied pilots not always had a numerical advantage.

 

For career mode I would suggest to have once in a while a mission with higher numbers of German planes, except in the last 2-3 month of the war.

 

Thanks, and yes, I am working on something related to that on the German player side. The idea is that starting with Chapter 2 in Rhineland (i.e., October 1944), German fighter units will start flying on days only when the weather is good. Right now that means they fly on all days of the 4 best weather conditions, but that fourth one is more or less what we would consider today to be borderline VFR conditions. It should reduce the number of flights on the player's side to a more realistic level for this time. 

[LukeFF]

4 hours ago, Juri_JS said:

The idea behind such combined missions was to achive temporary local numerical superiority. Sometimes it worked, like on a few occasions during Market Garden, other times it wasn't successful because the formations were attacked before they reached the target area or the Allies were able to send reinforcements.

Of course the Allied air forces were never outnumbered on the operational level in the west, but it did happen during a few missions, even late in the war, that's why I suggested to have a few missions with higher number of Luftwaffe fighters in career mode on rare occasions.

 

I'll ask VikS about this. He's the one who creates all the mission templates. 

4 hours ago, Juri_JS said:

On 23 August 1944 over 60 fighters of five different Jagdgeschwader met over Montdidier to fly a mission against Allied fighter-bombers.

 

I think also though we must keep in mind that by August 1944 the fighter formations in Normandy were really worn down from constant combat. I just had a look at Axel Urbanke's book on III./JG 54 and he mentions that by the time they were pulled out of France their stafflen could typically put up only something like 2 to 4 planes at a time, hence the need for these Gefechtsverbande. 60 planes from 5 different JG sounds like a lot until you realize that's essentially 5 stafflen from 5 different fighter wings that had to be cobbled together to create a force that big. For an American fighter formation that would have simply meant one Fighter Group.

[Juri_JS]

22 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

I think also though we must keep in mind that by August 1944 the fighter formations in Normandy were really worn down from constant combat. I just had a look at Axel Urbanke's book on III./JG 54 and he mentions that by the time they were pulled out of France their stafflen could typically put up only something like 2 to 4 planes at a time, hence the need for these Gefechtsverbande. 60 planes from 5 different JG sounds like a lot until you realize that's essentially 5 stafflen from 5 different fighter wings that had to be cobbled together to create a force that big. For an American fighter formation that would have simply meant one Fighter Group.

Yes, of course this was one of the reasons for formations consisting of several JGs. Moreover at that point of the war it would have been suicidal to fly this type of mission with just a single Staffel of 12 planes. Larger formations were necessary to have any chance of success. Luftwaffe anti fighter-bomber missions late in the war in the west usually consisted of two sections, the second was responsible for high cover. A single Gruppe would often not have enough aircraft available for high cover, so missions by two Gruppen weren't uncommon.

[MarcoPegase44]

Already in Normandy the Luftwaffe was trying to only engage with numerical superiority occasionally by grouping together the resources of several wing groups to have a short temporary superiority.

On the other hand, many Allied pilots never encountered Luftwaffe planes during the war due to the great Allied superiority.

Furthermore, if many pilots were insufficiently trained, there remained enough experts and old hares who were very dangerous. On several occasions, P47 or Typhoon formations were surprised and suffered losses.

[Sgt_Joch]

There was a lot of interesting info on that here:

 

The R.C.A.F. Overseas, Volume 3: The Sixth Year - Canada.ca

 

The Army Air Forces in WWII (defense.gov)

 

Basically, after "Big Week" in Feb.44, the Luftwaffe gave up trying to contest the Allies all the time and instead husbanded their resources to try to achieve local superiority. In 1944, they actually had a surplus of single engined fighters but a limited amount of qualified pilots and fuel, which was the real limiting factor.

 

In the strategic bombing offensive in sept.- dec. 44, U.S. B-17s would fly every 1-2 days, often against zero opposition. The LW would try to build up their fuel reserve and every 2-3 weeks would put up huge numbers, 500-600, sometimes even 700 fighters at a time to intercept that day's bombing raid.

 

In the tactical zone, it was about the same, RCAF Spitfires would often run missions against zero opposition, but every 2-3 weeks would run into groups of 20-30 109s and/or 190s that the LW would put up in specific areas. RCAF flights that ran into these were often outnumbered.

Edited October 10, 2023 by Sgt_Joch

[twilson37]

The Luftwaffe like the Wehrmacht and SS in 1944-1945 was not much more than a Paper Panzer Mk VI.  Their logistics chain was in tatters, railyards blown to kingdom come,  tanks that couldn't be serviced in the field, fighter planes without gas, spare parts or men experienced enough to fly them, and all their equipment was being built by slave labor what had a vested interest in making sure it did not work. It is amazing how much of history is written about this relatively small theater of war(European Front from 6/44-5/45) and how much is slanted to make it look like the Allies had to face this amazing German War Machine. 

 

When planes the Luftwaffe had actually flew in numbers it was because the situation on the ground was too precarious not to, and when they did they got slaughtered because their pilots could barely fly in formation let alone combat the pilots of the RAF and USAAF.

 

I have had the pleasure of talking to a couple of 9th AF pilots each with several missions under their belt and they both said they never saw a German Aircraft.

 

All that being said, I have always wished the game had a mode where instead of flying against the same number of fighters each time it varied the frequency so one day may be none, another day there may be two or three, and the next 50 and the user was able to set a max-min, frequency, and skill level; sadly this is probably above the limits of the current platform. 

 

 

[tattywelshie]

During most of the RAF careers that I've started in Normandy, there is nearly always a flight of FW190's with bombs flying over to England, like most missions I do, there is a flight of them. Is this a glitch? Or did this actually happen, or is this part of the issue that will be resolved with lowering Luftwaffe numbers? 

[Gambit21]

13 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

 

Dude, drop it and use some useful sources. The idea that the 1945 Luftwaffe could sortie sufficient force to ‘outnumber’ anyone except an unlucky few caught in the wrong place at the wrong time is risible.

 

 

Thank you...saves me a post.

 

 

 

 

[Hoss]

LMOFAO... WHAT!!!!!!!!....no one wants it to be historically correct. like it actually was... Huh.......

 

It's going to be great when WWII Carrier stuff starts arriving...(oh...but not here) because it's been so long since those of us who were around, and flew WWII Carrier Ops in Pacific Fighters actually know, that we search, we locate, we launch attacks, and hope to find the IJN again..and vice, versa... well, maybe..... maybe not, shiznit, now I have to find my way back to my carrier... EEEeeefffff me Runnin', I forgot how Hayrake works... well shiznit!!!!!!... Esc...    refly.  I'll bet in 80-90% of the DF servers, the carriers will be static... just like in PF.. hopefully, someone like CB will migrate over to the new sample of WWII Aviation and make something along the lines of what we had in HSFX and SEOW style of online USN vs IJN... and DiD. Wishful thinking?

 

We constantly want and want some more, and then we're butt hurt and unhappy when we get it... Maybe we should sell off our HOTAS' and buy Fanatec racing gear and take up racing games... or go play with our kids, grandkids, and if lucky enough, our great-grandkids and heaven help us, our wives...  when they are taken from you you'll never get that time back...    It IS A video game after all, and in the scheme of life, completely irrelevant. Invest your time wisely, and in things that matter. Beware the Hucklebearer...

 

 

 

"It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so". Brought to you by.... Samuel Langhorn Clemens, not so live.... from Halley's Comet

Sempre Fortis.....

Edited October 10, 2023 by Hoss

[vonGraf]

Wasn't there a Romanian fighter IAR 80 in development some time ago?

Is it canceled meanwhile?

[Gambit21]

4 minutes ago, tattywelshie said:

During most of the RAF careers that I've started in Normandy, there is nearly always a flight of FW190's with bombs flying over to England, like most missions I do, there is a flight of them. Is this a glitch? Or did this actually happen, or is this part of the issue that will be resolved with lowering Luftwaffe numbers? 

 

The current career system has some limitations. It's basically a mission template where all possibilities exist, and the randomization is not quite as extensive as it could be/should be. I say this with some level of expertise as I've built "all possibilities exist" randomized mission templates where you'd never see this sort of repetition, and even includes randomized base vehicles, randomized convoys, trains etc etc. 

 

However, I did this for 2 maps, for 1 player aircraft type etc...so it was easier for me to add these features. VikS has to do this for every map, every base etc...so his job is more involved.  I can concentrate on 1 or bases that the player operates from...he has a whole map. I do think this should be improving over time rather being left as is...but he has other things on his plate for sure, and it's a lengthy, tedious job. 

 

In essence, much more is possible with current mission logic than what you experience in the career, but the number of maps/bases (and to some degree vision of the creator) which have to be worked with limits the final output.

5 minutes ago, Hoss said:

LMAO... I guess no one wants it to be like it actually was.... historically correct...

 

I can't wait until Carrier stuff starts arriving...(not here)  because its been so long since those of us who were there, and actually flew WWII Carrier missions in Pacific Fighters, actually know, we search, we locate, we launch attacks, and hope to find the IJN again... maybe..... maybe not, well shiznit, now I have to find my way back to my carrier... crap, I forgot how Hayrake works.... crap... Esc...refly..

 

We want, want, want..and want some more, and then we're unhappy when we get it... Maybe everyone should just buy Fanatec racing gear and take up racing games... or go play with our kids, grandkids, great grandkids, or....  talk to our wives...  before they are gone..... because you'll never get that time back...

 

 

 

I'd give you a thousand upvotes if I had them my friend.

[Lusekofte]

1 hour ago, vonGraf said:

Wasn't there a Romanian fighter IAR 80 in development some time ago?

Is it canceled meanwhile?

It’s will be out by the end of this year

 

1 hour ago, Gambit21 said:

The current career system has some limitations

What bothering me most about career and online mission making is not something easily one can’t point fingers on. 
I can only compare to other experiences from other games.  If you take old IL 2, the sense of repetition was not there and I can do a campaign in DCS several times without it feel repetitive.  
It might be the sense of life around these campaigns. A dynamic campaign in old IL 2 was made in a way that they sometimes was a slight possibility to survive and other times impossible. And next time it was doable. It felt like an accomplishment. In DCS it can always be done better, you can improve. 
In career mode your wing is not helping you. And if attacked often it is instadeath by pk or explosion. Before in campaign you could pray for getting over to friendly lines with your stricken airplane.  
Flying a bomber or a big slow attack plane is most fun in a little to none populated server over heavily defended targets like a convoy. 
Every time it end differently and the damage you get is sometime instantly dead sometimes you can return damaged and other times you crash land. Career now means if fighter reach your flight it is just dead. No chance at all to recover once attacked. And if you survive next mission feel repetitive. And if you fly bomber your wing might not drop the bombs or something else fubar the mission

Edited October 10, 2023 by Lusekofte

[Marcio]

14 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

‘Scrambles’ are 2 - 4 aircraft. Yep, you might be outnumbered should you encounter a Staffel or 2. That means the whole Allies air power in France and Belgium?

 

Dude, drop it and use some useful sources. The idea that the 1945 Luftwaffe could sortie sufficient force to ‘outnumber’ anyone except an unlucky few caught in the wrong place at the wrong time is risible.

 

As attested to by 95% of the primary, secondary and tertiary works on the subject.

 

  1.  "Does that mean all the Allied air power in France and Belgium?"

 

        No, and I didn't say that! Simply factors such as logistics, type of mission, altitude, weather conditions, time and chronological period could interfere in the balance of forces, which, in most cases, was favorable to the allies.

 

        It's like a partially cloudy sky... the tendency of clouds may be greater but that doesn't mean that we can't observe some parts of blue sky among the clouds!

 

 2.    "Dude, leave it alone and use some helpful sources. The idea that the Luftwaffe of 1945 could muster enough strength to “overwhelm” anyone but a few unlucky ones caught in the wrong place at the wrong time is risible."

 

        I didn't say that!!! Your lack of knowledge about Statistics and the meaning of random is laughable!

 

       In this new condition (v. 5107) fly with allied aircraft... it will be very peaceful and your aircraft will return intact, at least if you don't skid, roll over or suffer pilonation during landing!

[LukeFF]

3 hours ago, twilson37 said:

All that being said, I have always wished the game had a mode where instead of flying against the same number of fighters each time it varied the frequency so one day may be none, another day there may be two or three, and the next 50 and the user was able to set a max-min, frequency, and skill level; sadly this is probably above the limits of the current platform. 

 

It's not really beyond the platform's limit, but rather it's a matter of taking the time to update the templates to allow such a thing. 

 

Sooo, I'm not saying it's going to happen, but the proposal has at least been communicated to the guy in charge of developing the core career mode structure. ?

 

2 hours ago, tattywelshie said:

During most of the RAF careers that I've started in Normandy, there is nearly always a flight of FW190's with bombs flying over to England, like most missions I do, there is a flight of them. Is this a glitch? Or did this actually happen, or is this part of the issue that will be resolved with lowering Luftwaffe numbers? 

 

You'll probably see it less often, yes. This is one of those side effects of re-using templates that worked fine for other theaters but when it comes to Normandy, not so much.

 

50 minutes ago, Marcio said:

In this new condition (v. 5107) fly with allied aircraft... it will be very peaceful and your aircraft will return intact, at least if you don't skid, roll over or suffer pilonation during landing!

 

I suggest actually waiting for the update to come out before judging whether or not you like the changes. ?

[Gambit21]

17 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

It's not really beyond the platform's limit, but rather it's a matter of taking the time to update the templates to allow such a thing. 

 

Sooo, I'm not saying it's going to happen, but the proposal has at least been communicated to the guy in charge of developing the core career mode structure. ?

 

 

You'll probably see it less often, yes. This is one of those side effects of re-using templates that worked fine for other theaters but when it comes to Normandy, not so much.

 

 

I suggest actually waiting for the update to come out before judging whether or not you like the changes. ?

The career should reflect the abilities of the mission logic to a greater extent. While testing I flew 2 career missions and couldn’t stand the thought of a 3rd. That’s the last time I bothered, because I know what the mission logic is capable of.

 

Hand-crafted missions will always be superior, but the quality difference is a chasm that needn’t be quite so wide. 
Sterile bases, runway starts, too few aircraft in the flight, lack of variety, lack of environment etc etc.

Not a reflection on you at all - it’s the core logic/approach/philosophy that is wanting.

[LF_Mark_Krieger]

11 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

It's not really beyond the platform's limit, but rather it's a matter of taking the time to update the templates to allow such a thing. 

 

Sooo, I'm not saying it's going to happen, but the proposal has at least been communicated to the guy in charge of developing the core career mode structure. ?

 

 

You'll probably see it less often, yes. This is one of those side effects of re-using templates that worked fine for other theaters but when it comes to Normandy, not so much.

 

 

I suggest actually waiting for the update to come out before judging whether or not you like the changes. ?

I really hope that 5.107 will make careers in Rhineland and Normandy more realistic. I understand too that perhaps some players would prefer an option of it not beeing so realistic and raise the number of german planes to not be so outnumbered if they play the german side or more challenged if they play allies. Well, there is the actual system of difficulty and density of the front, that perhaps could be somewhat improved or better explained of how it affects the mission (level of the IA on the air and ground and numbers), so each player can adapt a bit the careers to their preference. Anyway, a standard "realist mode" in all theaters is the priority for me. I understand this is a tedious task that requires a lot of hours, but I think it pays the effort.

Edited October 11, 2023 by LF_Mark_Krieger

[LukeFF]

16 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

The career should reflect the abilities of the mission logic to a greater extent. While testing I flew 2 career missions and couldn’t stand the thought of a 3rd. That’s the last time I bothered, because I know what the mission logic is capable of.

 

Hand-crafted missions will always be superior, but the quality difference is a chasm that needn’t be quite so wide. 
Sterile bases, runway starts, too few aircraft in the flight, lack of variety, lack of environment etc etc.

Not a reflection on you at all - it’s the core logic/approach/philosophy that is wanting.

 

Well, that's why I do bug the guys continually with my ideas. ?? More people are working on career now (it's no longer just VikS, who's already stretched in 10,000 directions), so more improvements are likely to come.

7 hours ago, LF_Mark_Krieger said:

I really hope that 5.107 will make careers in Rhineland and Normandy more realistic. I understand too that perhaps some players would prefer an option of it not beeing so realistic and raise the number of german planes to not be so outnumbered if they play the german side or more challenged if they play allies. Well, there is the actual system of difficulty and density of the front, that perhaps could be somewhat improved or better explained of how it affects the mission (level of the IA on the air and ground and numbers), so each player can adapt a bit the careers to their preference. Anyway, a standard "realist mode" in all theaters is the priority for me. I understand this is a tedious task that requires a lot of hours, but I think it pays the effort.

 

Yes, one other thing planned for career in the next update is a better description of what each career difficulty option controls.

[tattywelshie]

Looks like career mode is getting plenty of love, which is fab news! 

[the_emperor]

Will current/old FMs get corrected/reviewed with the upcoming patch?

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, the_emperor said:

Will current/old FMs get corrected/reviewed with the upcoming patch?

 

I've not seen anything about that, no. But, we are still in alpha right now, so stuff can change. ? The focus right now is to make sure the FMs for the three new planes are up to standard before they are released.