Brief Room Episode 2: 2023 In Review, Plans For 2024, A Glimpse At The Upcoming Title

[Hoss]

On 1/2/2024 at 10:37 AM, RNAS10_Mitchell said:

I did not hear them say anything about carriers in the latest stream..  maybe I missed it?   I know carriers were a non starter in the current setup, but i would assume they are back in the plan for the "new and improved " iteration?

If there is no US Navy involvement in this game with carriers flying Panthers, Corsairs, and Skyraiders, then I will not be purchasing it. That Corsair could be a Marine version flown from shore, we did not see any markings on any of their models. The Mustang did not have the red stripe on its insignia, denoting Korean-era planes.

If it doesn't go Haze Grey and underway, I'm not wasting money on it.

 

JMTCW

 

 

[deathmisser]

I've been looking at the causality list and you can make up at least one module with just props.

 

You could just make a second one again with just props at a push.

While a third can be just jets. 

 

If they are going to make a series out of Korea then I would like them to add as many plane as possible over X amount of modules.  

[Hoss]

8 hours ago, CountZero said:

for variety i guess, they did something, you only realy need MiG-15s if its up to me how big map needs to be no one will be flying slow props

You are only thinking of later in the war engagements when the F-86 finally showed up to take on the Mig-15.

 

               

 

Spoiler

Attack at Suwon

North Korean aircraft first met US aircraft in combat during the Battle of Suwon Airfield, in which 7 of the 13 North Korean aircraft were destroyed. The Lavochkin La-7 and Ilyushin Il-10 were easily outmatched by the superior F-82s and F-80Cs, which also had better-trained pilots. The 8th Fighter Wing, which was attempting to defend Suwon to allow evacuation of US civilians, encountered repeated harassing attacks from the North Koreans operating out of Heijo Airfield in Pyongyang. Heijo was the KPAF's main base, but in the first few days of the war the US pilots only had authorization to defend themselves if attacked; they could not conduct offensive operations into North Korea.

 

 

 

Spoiler

Raid of Heijo Airfield

North Korean Ilyushin Il-10 at Kimpo International Airport, South Korea.

On 29 June the KPAF returned to attack Suwon, and six sorties strafed the airfield during the morning, but each time were driven off by F-80s. In the course of these attacks Lieutenant William T. Norris and Lieutenant Roy W. Marsh each shot down a North Korean aircraft.^[15] The North Koreans were able to destroy a C-54 Skymaster parked at the airfield.^[16] The sorties culminated in a battle above Suwon during a conference of US military leaders in the town. Leaders including MacArthur and Lieutenant General George E. Stratemeyer personally witnessed the final sortie of the day, in which four North Korean aircraft attacked four P-51 Mustangs over the town. The P-51s succeeded in shooting down all four North Korean aircraft, with Lieutenant Orrin R. Fox scoring two kills and Lieutenants Richard J. Burns, and Harry T. Sandlin scoring one each.^[15] Ground forces also downed a North Korean aircraft during a subsequent attack.^[17] MacArthur subsequently authorized Stratemeyer to launch strikes into North Korea to destroy North Korean airfields and establish air superiority for the US forces.^[15]

The 8th Tactical Reconnaissance Squadron sent aircraft to scout all of North Korea's airfields. By the afternoon, the aircraft had not completed their scouting missions, but a bombing mission was nonetheless ordered against Heijo. At 16:15, 18 B-26 Invaders of the 3rd Bombardment Group took off from airbases in Japan. This would be the first offensive action against North Korea. The aircraft arrived at the airfield just after dark. There they found a substantial number of aircraft from North Korea's 1st Air Division parked on the tarmac, caught completely by surprise. The US subsequently placed their fragmentation bombs along the hangar line, ramps, and revetment areas. In the confusion, the North Koreans were only able to get one aircraft off the ground to oppose the flight, a Yak-3 which was quickly shot down by Staff Sergeant Nyle S. Mickley, a gunner aboard one of the bombers. By the end of the raid, the US destroyed an estimated 25 North Korean aircraft on the ground and one in the air while suffering no losses.

Subsequent strikes

A North Korean Yak-9 inspected by Australian servicemen at Kimpo, 1950

With the successful strike on Heijo Airfield, the UN attempted more attacks against North Korean airfields. The 19th Bombardment Group launched a 2 July strike at Yonpo Airfield based on faulty intelligence that there were 65 aircraft there. Only 16 aircraft were in the field, none of which were damaged by the airstrike. In the meantime, Task Force 77 launched attacks on airfields in Pyongyang and Ojong-ni, downing two aircraft and damaging ten others in the 3-4 July attack. On 6 July a flight of four North Korean Yak-9s with ROKAF markings attacked Osan and damaged a telephone station, though for the rest of the week, North Korean air forces stayed out of the sky.^[19]

When they returned to the fight a week later, the North Koreans employed guerrilla tactics with their aircraft, some continuing to use ROKAF markings and timing their strikes when UN patrols were out of the skies refueling. On 10 July, seven Yak-9s were hidden at the captured Kimpo airfield and used in strikes against UN positions at Cheongju. The next day they surprised and damaged several F-80s in the area. On 12 July the Yak-9s shot down a B-29 as it was bombing bridges in Seoul. Two more attacked a flight of F-80s flying over the battle at Chochiwon, damaging them. By the end of the day, another UN L-4 had been shot down. On 15 July two more Yaks ambushed a flight of B-26s near Taejon, forcing one to land.^[19] Airstrikes against UN ground positions at Taejon persisted until 19 July. The North Koreans strafed ground positions and also dropped propaganda leaflets signed by US prisoners of war.^[20]

In counterattacks against the KPAF, the UN responded on 15 July with an attack on Kimpo, destroying two or three of the seven Yak-9s there and damaging the runway at the airfield. On 18 July Task Force 77 attacked Pyongyang and Pyongyang East Airfields, destroying 14 aircraft and damaging 13 more. The next day, Task Force 77 attacked Yonpo and destroyed 15 more aircraft there, and three more at Sondok. That day near Pyongyang, the F-80s of the 8th Fighter-Bomber Group destroyed another 14 fighters and one bomber and damaged seven others. On 20 July another strike by 14 B-29s destroyed the runways at Pyongyang and Onjong-ni. In the process of these strikes, the UN aircraft also shot down six North Korean aircraft opposing the attacks. By the end of the day on 20 July only 65 of the KPAF 1st Air Division's original aircraft were intact, and only 34 of them were operable.^[21]

North Korean airpower ceased to resist UN forces after 20 July, except for isolated engagements. On 5-6 August the final airstrikes on Pyongyang airfields destroyed another 18 combat aircraft, and 7 more were damaged. By this point the North Korean Air Force was considered to have been destroyed, losing 110 aircraft and only possessing 35, with only 18 operable. Through August and September, the North Koreans could only muster at most 16 sorties per day, most by isolated, single aircraft

 

Air attack on USS Rochester and HMS Jamaica

Just before daylight at 05:50 on 17 September, two Soviet-made North Korean aircraft—probably Yakovlev Yak-9s—were seen overhead from Jamaica, and while trying to identify them any doubts about their allegiance and intentions were resolved by the explosion of a bomb close to the port side of Rochester. Four bombs were dropped, one hitting and denting Rochester's crane but not exploding. There were no American casualties. As the aircraft turned away Jamaica opened fire with her port 4-inch (102 mm) battery on the leading aircraft. The second aircraft then turned to port to strafe Jamaica, scoring several hits: one armor-piercing round entering Y turret through the armor at the back of the gun house and wounding a man in the leg; one chipping the side armor of the ship; one exploding round burst on the plate surrounding the loaders of a quadruple pom-pom, wounding three men (one of whom died later of his wounds after being transferred to the hospital ship USS Consolation); and one on the foremast at the level of the gun direction platform, scattering small splinters. Every close-range weapon available opened fire on this aircraft, which disintegrated as it went over the ship, crashing close to the starboard side of Jamaica.

 

 

The prop planes had a short but sweet history in the war... but they had a part in it.    

F-86's

The war started June 25, 1950 the first Saber dogfights didn't take place until December 17, 1950, the same month the Sabres arrived in Korea. The American aircraft were F-86-As of the Fourth Flight Interceptor Wing, and they made their debut by downing four MiGs. This presented their enemy with a much more formidable foe than the F-51 Mustangs and F-80 Shooting Stars which in the previous seven weeks had experienced a very hard time coping with them. SIX MONTHS without Sabers...

 

F9F Panthers

Now, if we're talking who threw the first punches.....

 

Once President Truman authorized U.S. forces to intervene in the conflict, one of their first objectives was obtaining air superiority. On the morning of July 3, the Navy dispatched piston-engine Skyraider and Corsair fighters from the carrier USS Valley Forge to destroy the NKPAF’s aircraft at the airfield in Pyongyang. Flying their first combat mission, F9F-3 jets of VF-51 (Screaming Eagles) swept ahead of the main force to clear the skies of any North Korean fighters that made it into the air.

As the blue jets screamed over the airfield, a handful of North Korean Yak-9s scrambled to meet them. In the ensuing tussle, Ensign Eldon Brown and Lt. Jg. Leonard Plog each shot down one of the compact piston-engine fighters—the first aerial victories of the Korean War. Plog recalled that one of the Yaks “had a perfect run on me, but had never shot anything moving so fast.”

In a matter of days, the North Korean Air Force was swept from the skies. Four months later, Soviet pilots began harrying U.N. forces using MiG-15 jets based across the Yalu River in China. The MiG-15 was a lighter, swept-wing design—and happened also to use a souped-up Soviet derivative of the Nene turbojet. The MiG had better high-altitude performance than the Panther and P-80 and was faster by a hundred miles per hour.

 

On November 9, Panthers were providing top cover for a strike on a bridge at Sinuiju, on the border with China, when they were intercepted by MiG-15s of the 139th Guards Fighter Regiment led by Capt. Mikhail Grachev. The commanding officer of VF-111 “Sundowners” squadron, Lt. Cdr. William Amen, noticed Grachev’s MiG closing on his tail and turned around to engage. The Soviet fighter lost track of the Panther’s position, and Amen and his wingman George Holloman fell behind the MiG and raked it with their cannons.

Zigzagging evasively, Grachev dove steeply downwards to shake off his pursuers, but Amen matched his maneuver and continued to fire bursts even as his airframe was buffeted by the stress of approaching terminal velocity. Amen finally pulled out of the dive with just two hundred feet to spare. Grachev’s MiG smashed into the side of a mountain.

This likely made the Panther the first jet to shoot down another in combat. The day before, P-80s had clashed with MiG-15s in the first battle between jet fighters. However, Soviet and U.S. records don’t confirm kills claimed by either side but do concur regarding the engagement on November 9.

Panthers shot down two more MiGs on November 18, 1950—but the next aerial battle did not occur until exactly two years later. The Navy and Marines knew their fighters were outclassed by the MiGs and focused on coastal operations while the Air Force’s new F-86 Sabre jets tackled “Mig Alley” on the Chinese border.

 

 

JMTCW

 

[Gambit21]

7 hours ago, deathmisser said:

I've been looking at the causality list and you can make up at least one module with just props.

 

You could just make a second one again with just props at a push.

While a third can be just jets. 

 

If they are going to make a series out of Korea then I would like them to add as many plane as possible over X amount of modules.  

 

They're not going to do that.

Cue -  "how do you know, are you a dev?" response.

 

 Look for jets and props, and essentially the "A-Team" aircraft including MiG 15, Sabre, F-51, Corsair, La-11 etc.

[deathmisser]

7 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

They're not going to do that.

Cue -  "how do you know, are you a dev?" response.

 

 Look for jets and props, and essentially the "A-Team" aircraft including MiG 15, Sabre, F-51, Corsair, La-11 etc.

Depends on how they want to do things new from now on. I mean a year worth of silence anyone lol

But yea from my list about all things the next one will have. it said "prop based" so who knows really. Well part from the devs hehe. 

[Gambit21]

7 hours ago, deathmisser said:

Depends on how they want to do things new from now on. I mean a year worth of silence anyone lol 
But yea from my list about all things the next one will have. it said "prop based" so who knows really. Well part from the devs hehe. 

 

You guys need to let go of "prop based." That term was used very loosely and meant to throw you off the scent.

 We already have "prop-based" with jets, Korea will also be "prop-based" with jets. 

[CountZero]

9 minutes ago, Hoss said:

You are only thinking of later in the war engagements when the F-86 finally showed up to take on the Mig-15.

 

               

Attack at Suwon

North Korean aircraft first met US aircraft in combat during the Battle of Suwon Airfield, in which 7 of the 13 North Korean aircraft were destroyed. The Lavochkin La-7 and Ilyushin Il-10 were easily outmatched by the superior F-82s and F-80Cs, which also had better-trained pilots. The 8th Fighter Wing, which was attempting to defend Suwon to allow evacuation of US civilians, encountered repeated harassing attacks from the North Koreans operating out of Heijo Airfield in Pyongyang. Heijo was the KPAF's main base, but in the first few days of the war the US pilots only had authorization to defend themselves if attacked; they could not conduct offensive operations into North Korea.

 

Raid of Heijo Airfield

North Korean Ilyushin Il-10 at Kimpo International Airport, South Korea.

On 29 June the KPAF returned to attack Suwon, and six sorties strafed the airfield during the morning, but each time were driven off by F-80s. In the course of these attacks Lieutenant William T. Norris and Lieutenant Roy W. Marsh each shot down a North Korean aircraft.^[15] The North Koreans were able to destroy a C-54 Skymaster parked at the airfield.^[16] The sorties culminated in a battle above Suwon during a conference of US military leaders in the town. Leaders including MacArthur and Lieutenant General George E. Stratemeyer personally witnessed the final sortie of the day, in which four North Korean aircraft attacked four P-51 Mustangs over the town. The P-51s succeeded in shooting down all four North Korean aircraft, with Lieutenant Orrin R. Fox scoring two kills and Lieutenants Richard J. Burns, and Harry T. Sandlin scoring one each.^[15] Ground forces also downed a North Korean aircraft during a subsequent attack.^[17] MacArthur subsequently authorized Stratemeyer to launch strikes into North Korea to destroy North Korean airfields and establish air superiority for the US forces.^[15]

The 8th Tactical Reconnaissance Squadron sent aircraft to scout all of North Korea's airfields. By the afternoon, the aircraft had not completed their scouting missions, but a bombing mission was nonetheless ordered against Heijo. At 16:15, 18 B-26 Invaders of the 3rd Bombardment Group took off from airbases in Japan. This would be the first offensive action against North Korea. The aircraft arrived at the airfield just after dark. There they found a substantial number of aircraft from North Korea's 1st Air Division parked on the tarmac, caught completely by surprise. The US subsequently placed their fragmentation bombs along the hangar line, ramps, and revetment areas. In the confusion, the North Koreans were only able to get one aircraft off the ground to oppose the flight, a Yak-3 which was quickly shot down by Staff Sergeant Nyle S. Mickley, a gunner aboard one of the bombers. By the end of the raid, the US destroyed an estimated 25 North Korean aircraft on the ground and one in the air while suffering no losses.

Subsequent strikes

A North Korean Yak-9 inspected by Australian servicemen at Kimpo, 1950

With the successful strike on Heijo Airfield, the UN attempted more attacks against North Korean airfields. The 19th Bombardment Group launched a 2 July strike at Yonpo Airfield based on faulty intelligence that there were 65 aircraft there. Only 16 aircraft were in the field, none of which were damaged by the airstrike. In the meantime, Task Force 77 launched attacks on airfields in Pyongyang and Ojong-ni, downing two aircraft and damaging ten others in the 3-4 July attack. On 6 July a flight of four North Korean Yak-9s with ROKAF markings attacked Osan and damaged a telephone station, though for the rest of the week, North Korean air forces stayed out of the sky.^[19]

When they returned to the fight a week later, the North Koreans employed guerrilla tactics with their aircraft, some continuing to use ROKAF markings and timing their strikes when UN patrols were out of the skies refueling. On 10 July, seven Yak-9s were hidden at the captured Kimpo airfield and used in strikes against UN positions at Cheongju. The next day they surprised and damaged several F-80s in the area. On 12 July the Yak-9s shot down a B-29 as it was bombing bridges in Seoul. Two more attacked a flight of F-80s flying over the battle at Chochiwon, damaging them. By the end of the day, another UN L-4 had been shot down. On 15 July two more Yaks ambushed a flight of B-26s near Taejon, forcing one to land.^[19] Airstrikes against UN ground positions at Taejon persisted until 19 July. The North Koreans strafed ground positions and also dropped propaganda leaflets signed by US prisoners of war.^[20]

In counterattacks against the KPAF, the UN responded on 15 July with an attack on Kimpo, destroying two or three of the seven Yak-9s there and damaging the runway at the airfield. On 18 July Task Force 77 attacked Pyongyang and Pyongyang East Airfields, destroying 14 aircraft and damaging 13 more. The next day, Task Force 77 attacked Yonpo and destroyed 15 more aircraft there, and three more at Sondok. That day near Pyongyang, the F-80s of the 8th Fighter-Bomber Group destroyed another 14 fighters and one bomber and damaged seven others. On 20 July another strike by 14 B-29s destroyed the runways at Pyongyang and Onjong-ni. In the process of these strikes, the UN aircraft also shot down six North Korean aircraft opposing the attacks. By the end of the day on 20 July only 65 of the KPAF 1st Air Division's original aircraft were intact, and only 34 of them were operable.^[21]

North Korean airpower ceased to resist UN forces after 20 July, except for isolated engagements. On 5-6 August the final airstrikes on Pyongyang airfields destroyed another 18 combat aircraft, and 7 more were damaged. By this point the North Korean Air Force was considered to have been destroyed, losing 110 aircraft and only possessing 35, with only 18 operable. Through August and September, the North Koreans could only muster at most 16 sorties per day, most by isolated, single aircraft

 

Air attack on USS Rochester and HMS Jamaica

Just before daylight at 05:50 on 17 September, two Soviet-made North Korean aircraft—probably Yakovlev Yak-9s—were seen overhead from Jamaica, and while trying to identify them any doubts about their allegiance and intentions were resolved by the explosion of a bomb close to the port side of Rochester. Four bombs were dropped, one hitting and denting Rochester's crane but not exploding. There were no American casualties. As the aircraft turned away Jamaica opened fire with her port 4-inch (102 mm) battery on the leading aircraft. The second aircraft then turned to port to strafe Jamaica, scoring several hits: one armor-piercing round entering Y turret through the armor at the back of the gun house and wounding a man in the leg; one chipping the side armor of the ship; one exploding round burst on the plate surrounding the loaders of a quadruple pom-pom, wounding three men (one of whom died later of his wounds after being transferred to the hospital ship USS Consolation); and one on the foremast at the level of the gun direction platform, scattering small splinters. Every close-range weapon available opened fire on this aircraft, which disintegrated as it went over the ship, crashing close to the starboard side of Jamaica.

 

 

The prop planes had a short but sweet history in the war... but they had a part in it.    

F-86's

The war started June 25, 1950 the first Saber dogfights didn't take place until December 17, 1950, the same month the Sabres arrived in Korea. The American aircraft were F-86-As of the Fourth Flight Interceptor Wing, and they made their debut by downing four MiGs. This presented their enemy with a much more formidable foe than the F-51 Mustangs and F-80 Shooting Stars which in the previous seven weeks had experienced a very hard time coping with them. SIX MONTHS without Sabers...

 

F9F Panthers

Now, if we're talking who threw the first punches.....

 

Once President Truman authorized U.S. forces to intervene in the conflict, one of their first objectives was obtaining air superiority. On the morning of July 3, the Navy dispatched piston-engine Skyraider and Corsair fighters from the carrier USS Valley Forge to destroy the NKPAF’s aircraft at the airfield in Pyongyang. Flying their first combat mission, F9F-3 jets of VF-51 (Screaming Eagles) swept ahead of the main force to clear the skies of any North Korean fighters that made it into the air.

As the blue jets screamed over the airfield, a handful of North Korean Yak-9s scrambled to meet them. In the ensuing tussle, Ensign Eldon Brown and Lt. Jg. Leonard Plog each shot down one of the compact piston-engine fighters—the first aerial victories of the Korean War. Plog recalled that one of the Yaks “had a perfect run on me, but had never shot anything moving so fast.”

In a matter of days, the North Korean Air Force was swept from the skies. Four months later, Soviet pilots began harrying U.N. forces using MiG-15 jets based across the Yalu River in China. The MiG-15 was a lighter, swept-wing design—and happened also to use a souped-up Soviet derivative of the Nene turbojet. The MiG had better high-altitude performance than the Panther and P-80 and was faster by a hundred miles per hour.

 

On November 9, Panthers were providing top cover for a strike on a bridge at Sinuiju, on the border with China, when they were intercepted by MiG-15s of the 139th Guards Fighter Regiment led by Capt. Mikhail Grachev. The commanding officer of VF-111 “Sundowners” squadron, Lt. Cdr. William Amen, noticed Grachev’s MiG closing on his tail and turned around to engage. The Soviet fighter lost track of the Panther’s position, and Amen and his wingman George Holloman fell behind the MiG and raked it with their cannons.

Zigzagging evasively, Grachev dove steeply downwards to shake off his pursuers, but Amen matched his maneuver and continued to fire bursts even as his airframe was buffeted by the stress of approaching terminal velocity. Amen finally pulled out of the dive with just two hundred feet to spare. Grachev’s MiG smashed into the side of a mountain.

This likely made the Panther the first jet to shoot down another in combat. The day before, P-80s had clashed with MiG-15s in the first battle between jet fighters. However, Soviet and U.S. records don’t confirm kills claimed by either side but do concur regarding the engagement on November 9.

Panthers shot down two more MiGs on November 18, 1950—but the next aerial battle did not occur until exactly two years later. The Navy and Marines knew their fighters were outclassed by the MiGs and focused on coastal operations while the Air Force’s new F-86 Sabre jets tackled “Mig Alley” on the Chinese border.

 

JMTCW

 

 

How is december 1950 later in war ? its basicly first few months of 3 year war they started to have MiG-15s vs F-86s

 

23 minutes ago, deathmisser said:

I've been looking at the causality list and you can make up at least one module with just props.

 

You could just make a second one again with just props at a push.

While a third can be just jets. 

 

If they are going to make a series out of Korea then I would like them to add as many plane as possible over X amount of modules.  

But jets played big role from start, you have to have F-80 from day one of war, also who would buy Korea game without F-86 and MiG-15, its like lets do BoB and not have Spitfiers and 109s, its posible but stpid ?

 

[76IAP-Black]

I'm waiting for the second part of the video, that should bring some more light into this situation.

 

I'm not interested in Korea, I have nothing that draws me in.

 

I was flying mig Alley back in the days, but that's it. 

[BraveSirRobin]

The most obvious signal that we’re getting the Mig15/F86 is the B-29 model.  There is no point having a B-29 in the game if you don’t have the MiG 15.

[Gambit21]

1 minute ago, BraveSirRobin said:

The most obvious signal that we’re getting the Mig15/F86 is the B-29 model.  There is no point having a B-29 in the game if you don’t have the MiG 15.

 

Also not getting laughed off of the planet because you made a Korea module without the MiG or Sabre. 

[BraveSirRobin]

7 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

Also not getting laughed off of the planet because you made a Korea module without the MiG or Sabre. 

I was going to comment on the stupidity of doing such a thing, but CountZero already covered that ground.  It just felt like piling on.

[Trooper117]

Of course there will be jets from the start... if people think otherwise they are going to be very sad when their bubble bursts when it gets released.

The Dev's aren't mad, they know a large part of their fan base will be itching to blast Yankee air pilots in their B-29's with their superior Migs... you can bet your life on it.

[deathmisser]

I think you all forgetting something very important here.

 

Games are meant to be fun I am also having fun of making what if. 

Just because your passionate about a few things doesn't mean anyone else doesn't have the right to dream.   

[Gambit21]

6 hours ago, deathmisser said:

I think you all forgetting something very important here.

 

Games are meant to be fun I am also having fun of making what if. 

Just because your passionate about a few things doesn't mean anyone else doesn't have the right to dream.   

 

You go ahead and have all of the "what if" dreaming fun that you want, but that also means other's get to answer you.

Works both ways my friend. 

[BlitzPig_EL]

I just hope they build the F-82.   The few that were on hand in the Far East Air Force did good work in the early weeks/months of the war.  Photo recon, airfield defense, and they even were pressed into the ground attack role, which they actually were pretty good at even though they were not trained for that as they were the USAF's first "All Weather Interceptor".  Their long range (1400 miles), generous gun ammo load out (400 rounds per gun) and ability to carry 4000lbs, of ordinance on their wing pylons gave them the ability to loiter over an area and provide more than just "one pass and haul ass" capability. 

 

And they were not exactly slow.  460+ mph.

Edited January 3, 2024 by BlitzPig_EL

[Rjel]

58 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

Of course there will be jets from the start... if people think otherwise they are going to be very sad when their bubble bursts when it gets released.

The Dev's aren't mad, they know a large part of their fan base will be itching to blast Yankee air pilots in their B-29's with their superior Migs... you can bet your life on it.

Isn't it Yankee Air Pirates?

Edited January 4, 2024 by Rjel
Is.....isn't

[deathmisser]

6 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

You go ahead and have all of the "what if" dreaming fun that you want, but that also means other's get to answer you.

Works both ways my friend. 

I just feel like I can't chat here without people shooting me down.

 

First it was "oh I can't guess what module it will be other than Korea"

Then it was "oh you hoped it was something else as you disliked Korea, then why are you happily chatting about it now ?"

Now it's like "Sorry m8 your stupid to not include X and Y aircraft" 

 

It's does get overwhelming for a person who just want to have fun and chatting. 

 

As for other user's and readers sorry for this but it had to be said.  

[Rjel]

2 minutes ago, deathmisser said:

I just feel like I can't chat here without people shooting me down.

 

First it was "oh I can't guess what module it will be other than Korea"

Then it was "oh you hoped it was something else as you disliked Korea, then why are you happily chatting about it now ?"

Now it's like "Sorry m8 your stupid to not include X and Y aircraft" 

 

It's does get overwhelming for a person who just want to have fun and chatting. 

 

As for other user's and readers sorry for this but it had to be said.  

 

I don't think anyone's been shooting you down necessarily. Just forum banter. You had an exchange with another poster in the other thread that you may have been guilty of a similar sin. Blow it all off. We all piss someone off at some point. It really doesn't matter in the overall scheme of things.

[BraveSirRobin]

6 hours ago, deathmisser said:

Now it's like "Sorry m8 your stupid to not include X and Y aircraft" 

The MiG 17 and F-86 aren’t just random aircraft.  They’re the 2 most iconic aircraft to fight in this war.

[deathmisser]

3 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

The MiG 17 and F-86 aren’t just random aircraft.  They’re the 2 most iconic aircraft to fight in this war.

You could say that about the Spitfire & Hurricane since it pretty much saved Europe and at a stretch Russia. 

One of thee most iconic fighter of WW2, yet we didn't see the Spit until Kuban and the Hurricane a bit later. 

 

Since they don't know what planes they are wanting in the module, I say don't count all of you chickens yet. 

[BraveSirRobin]

5 hours ago, deathmisser said:

You could say that about the Spitfire & Hurricane 

Yes, you could.  And it would be equally idiotic to not include them in a Battle of Britain game.

 

5 hours ago, deathmisser said:

 

One of thee most iconic fighter of WW2, yet we didn't see the Spit until Kuban and the Hurricane a bit later. 

 

Probably because neither of those aircraft actually played a significant part in the war in the east.  

[MiGCap]

I find the F-80 and F9F much more interesting than the F-86 and MiG-15. Have both modules in DCS and never flew them once.

But of course, F-86/MiG-15 ist the iconic duel pair in the Korean conflict.

[Gambit21]

5 hours ago, MiGCap said:

I find the F-80 and F9F much more interesting than the F-86 and MiG-15. Have both modules in DCS and never flew them once.

But of course, F-86/MiG-15 ist the iconic duel pair in the Korean conflict.

 

I never thought much about the F9F, but the more I've looked into Korea, the more I think it would be a very neat aircraft to have.

If course I'm also imagining great sound, rumbling, shaking, top drawer level stuff.  It remains to be seen what can be pulled off here in that regard.

[MiGCap]

27 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

 

I never thought much about the F9F, but the more I've looked into Korea, the more I think it would be a very neat aircraft to have.

If course I'm also imagining great sound, rumbling, shaking, top drawer level stuff.  It remains to be seen what can be pulled off here in that regard.

 

 

 

 

I am a big fan of the F9F since I have read the old Buck Danny comics back in the 1970s ... 

 

Edit:

Edited January 4, 2024 by MiGCap

[Hamaha15]

 

Finally: a more modern airfield lighting system...

Edited January 4, 2024 by Hamaha15

[JG27_Steini]

19 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

What makes you think there is no La-11 planned?

 

Just see what shakes out.

 

Just dont understand why we will get probs when a) they were used by russians very limited and b) you will get annihilated in SP or in MP as it was in RL.

 

19 hours ago, CountZero said:

for variety i guess, they did something, you only realy need MiG-15s if its up to me how big map needs to be no one will be flying slow props

 

I also dont understand why mix types of planes. The majority wont fly slow props in MP or SP. If it is really Korea, then they should name it Sabre vs Mig, because this will be the final result. Slow fighter/bomber will just be annihilated by +100mph faster jet fighter. Any variety and kind of balance we have now, will be over. Unlike most other theatres Korea is very unbalcanced at the end. Modern vs old planes type and huge variety US planes vs limited russian type of planes. Korea is in many aspects a dead end in my mind. I cant see a living MP community with interesseting settings like whe have now in GB.

[Soto_Cinematics]

On 1/2/2024 at 2:56 PM, Gunfreak said:

Again Cliffs over Dover have you covered. 1 map so far. 2 more in the works.

 

On 1/2/2024 at 2:56 PM, Gunfreak said:

 

Cliffs cover ETO 1940-1942 and Mediterranean well.

 

IMO IL-2 Cliffs of Dover is going to have a big comeback. Dieppe and Central and Western Desert are coming and with the B-17, Lancaster, future B-24 and new scenarios that include RAF night bombing campaign, Malta and Sicily, and more aircraft sets, Cliffs of Dover is the way forward for 1940-1944 European air war simulation as IL-2 Great Battles goes to post-WWII.

 

So the way I see how each sim will be utilised:

 

IL-2 Cliffs of Dover - Western ETO, MTO 1940-1944

IL-2 Great Battles - Eastern ETO 1941-1943, Western ETO 1944-1945, early Cold War

DCS - Sandbox WWII, Cold War and modern day, no aircraft set to match specific scenarios

 

[ITAF_Rani]

1 hour ago, Soto_Cinematics said:

IMO IL-2 Cliffs of Dover is going to have a big comeback

Think so...

I see in this way

 

IL2GB relegated only to people interested to east front/ cold war

 

Clod: MTO-ETO 1940-44

 

Combat Pilot: Pacific

 

DCS : jets

 

Edited January 4, 2024 by ITAF_Rani

[ACG_Bussard]

6 hours ago, ITAF_Rani said:

Think so...

I see in this way

 

Clod: MTO-ETO 1940-44

 

Combat Pilot: Pacific

 

Sounds sexy to me. But it'll be a while before then, as CloD and CP still have a huge way to go.

[MajorMagee]

10 hours ago, MiGCap said:

 

I am a big fan of the F9F since I have read the old Buck Danny comics back in the 1970s ... 

 

Edit:

Yes, they are a lot of fun to fly.

 

 

[=MERCS=JenkemJunkie]

8 hours ago, JG27_Steini said:

Just dont understand why we will get probs when a) they were used by russians very limited and b) you will get annihilated in SP or in MP as it was in RL.

 

I also dont understand why mix types of planes. The majority wont fly slow props in MP or SP. If it is really Korea, then they should name it Sabre vs Mig, because this will be the final result. Slow fighter/bomber will just be annihilated by +100mph faster jet fighter. Any variety and kind of balance we have now, will be over. Unlike most other theatres Korea is very unbalcanced at the end. Modern vs old planes type and huge variety US planes vs limited russian type of planes. Korea is in many aspects a dead end in my mind. I cant see a living MP community with interesseting settings like whe have now in GB.

 

There's a easy solution for that. Just like how in Current BoX if you want the Hurricane/E7 to shine you don't include later planes like the 51/K4, if you want to build a mission where the Korean props shine then just trim the set to give a good matchup of prop planes only. I'm sure there will be servers where it's Mig/Sabre or GTFO and that's fine, but they don't all have to be that way, if you want a change of pace.

[Art-J]

8 hours ago, JG27_Steini said:

Just dont understand why we will get probs when a) they were used by russians very limited and b) you will get annihilated in SP or in MP as it was in RL.

 

I also dont understand why mix types of planes. The majority wont fly slow props in MP or SP. If it is really Korea, then they should name it Sabre vs Mig, because this will be the final result. Slow fighter/bomber will just be annihilated by +100mph faster jet fighter. Any variety and kind of balance we have now, will be over. Unlike most other theatres Korea is very unbalcanced at the end. Modern vs old planes type and huge variety US planes vs limited russian type of planes. Korea is in many aspects a dead end in my mind. I cant see a living MP community with interesseting settings like whe have now in GB.

 

Nah, sounds a bit like a MP fighter jock mentality, combined with limited knowledge of that air war that happened there. If it was that simple everyone would just buy MiG and Sabre in DCS and fly them in that platform, but that's clearly not the case.

 

Keep in mind that silent majority of customers of this franchise (or DCS for that matter) have always been SP users. The same will apply to the "new project" (unless, God forbid, they decide to make it a multiplayer oriented only - everything's possible with Albert being the boss again).

 

There was enough action on the Korean front for the first half of year before Sabres even showed up to simulate scenarios other than jets-vs-jets. WIP aircraft shots suggest this is exactly the period devs are aiming at. In that timeframe It's true that air combat side quickly became one-sided, but ground support and tactical strikes for example were primary task (and remained throughout the whole war) so any scripted or dynamic SP campaigns aimed at historic realism will have to heavily rely on that. This is where prop planes did majority of the work all the way till 1953 and thus you can't really tell the story of Korean war without them.

 

At the same time, in MP, there will be no "annihilation", because historic numbers and training/experience limitations of red side will not apply to reality of game servers (just like they don't apply currently to Normandy/Rheinland MP scenarios). Here both sides will be equally experienced. 

 

Granted, I get what you're saying about stat-wh..re-players just hopping into the fastest things available on the server but that can be controlled with aircraft slot limitations, just like it happened with 262s in GB. Not to mention that I suspect majority of customers on this forum still have a preference for prop planes anyway. Otherwise we would all be playing DCS only.

[Avimimus]

8 hours ago, JG27_Steini said:

Just dont understand why we will get probs when a) they were used by russians very limited and b) you will get annihilated in SP or in MP as it was in RL.

 

I also dont understand why mix types of planes. The majority wont fly slow props in MP or SP. If it is really Korea, then they should name it Sabre vs Mig, because this will be the final result. Slow fighter/bomber will just be annihilated by +100mph faster jet fighter.

 

A few observations:

1) During the critical opening months, the presence of jet fighters was much less (on both sides), so one can choose to fly that critical period (and even make MP server rotations which include it).

 

2) Piston engined fighters may not be as uncompetitive as you think. While the jet fighters can almost always escape a piston plane (or run it down), the piston engined fighters often have better low speed handling and turn radii, which means they can put up a pretty good fight on the defence. There was that noted case where four Seafuries were attacked by eight Mig-15 and the Seafuries shot down one, with possibly two more damaged, for example.

 

3) If I wanted a simulation which only had two aircraft flyable, I might agree with you. But, I think you misestimate what many other people are interested in. In competitive online combat people will tend to gravitate to three or so types (e.g. best one-circle fighter, best energy fighter). However, in single-player against the AI a lot of people prefer to fly other aircraft in other roles, recreating history (or sometimes seeking a challenge).

 

I remember an old estimate that was something like 1/10 players fly online... this might have increased in recent years, but even if it has doubled, that still leaves 80% of people flying offline. If more than 1/4 of those prefer a challenge, then they will outnumber the online dogfighters! There is a reason why aircraft like the IAR-80/81, Ju-88C6 or the U-2VS exist, they might not sell quite as well as the hotrods, but there is still a market for them.

 

I think, also, as we accumulate years flying in flight simulators, we've often flown the Fw-190D9 in multiple flight simulators over the course of a decade... and, while nice, it is an experience that we're used to. Then someone offers a chance to fly a WACO glider in Normandy, or a Ju-88C6, and we become excited! 

 

For me, I'm interested in the Ta-152 primarily because of the aerodynamics (not the combat performance), I'm interested in the I-153 because of the challenge and nimbleness, and I'll be more interested in the F-80C and the Piston engined aircraft than I'll be interested in the Mig-15 Bis or F-86E.

[Robli]

I have to say that it is a bit weird side-step away from WWII, especially after they have already said that the next instalment after this one will go back to WWII in the Pacific.

Trying to put some logic into why they took such a side-step instead of going directly to the long-awaited Pacific, maybe they did not have enough information about Japanese planes and assets to start working on them immediately, while they obviously have the information about Russian planes that were used in Korea; some of which are variants of existing BoX planes, so closer to completion already from the start. Maybe the Russian-backed Korean war is also more interesting for the Russian market compared to the clash between Japan and USA. Doing Korea first also reduces the work of later Pacific game, as doing the variants of existing American planes is certainly less time consuming than building them from the scratch - so more time can be spent on the Japanese planes.

Edited January 4, 2024 by Robli

[76IAP-Black]

the most important question, so called elefant in the room is:

- will the next title be a part of GB
- will GB get the engine updates step by step 
- will they abonden GB in it's current engine and just provide "new content"

If you compare it with titles like DCS, Warthunder and FS2020 (exclude 2024 pls), then they should integrate GB into the new engine, add new feature to it and provide a long living eco system for WW2 and early Jets. Resell the stuff as a kind of 2.0, provide discount for the people who already have purchased GB stuff.

My 2 cents

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

21 minutes ago, 76IAP-Black said:

the most important question, so called elefant in the room is:

- will the next title be a part of GB
- will GB get the engine updates step by step 
- will they abonden GB in it's current engine and just provide "new content"

If you compare it with titles like DCS, Warthunder and FS2020 (exclude 2024 pls), then they should integrate GB into the new engine, add new feature to it and provide a long living eco system for WW2 and early Jets. Resell the stuff as a kind of 2.0, provide discount for the people who already have purchased GB stuff.

My 2 cents

It seams that they are limited by current engine, which can't be uplifted just by upgrade it ,same thing as msf2020. Btw it was upgrade from ROF and current GB but they hit the wall, not all game engines are made possible to catch up for two dacades.

Edited January 4, 2024 by 1PL-Husar-1Esk

[Avimimus]

34 minutes ago, Robli said:

I have to say that it is a bit weird side-step away from WWII, especially after they have already said that the next instalment after this one will go back to WWII in the Pacific.

 

 

Have they said this? I haven't seen them say this.

[Luftgangster]

On 1/2/2024 at 5:42 PM, Gambit21 said:

That's how many of us have felt about the Eastern Front since 2014 or before.

 

There's a reason the series is titled IL-2 Sturmovik and not P-47 Thunderbolt...

[Avimimus]

15 minutes ago, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

It seams that they are limited by current engine, which can't be uplifted just by upgrade it ,same thing as msf2020. Btw it was upgrade from ROF and current GB but they hit the wall, not all game engines are made possible to catch up for two dacades.

 

They have previously said they are going to use a new generation of their game engine (a new game engine would mean reprogramming everything from scratch). The question is whether the updated damage model, flight model, and more-over, rendering pipeline, will require ending backwards compatibility.

 

Somehow Flaming Cliffs has managed to survive in the DCS engine, but things like PBR may actually be what kills compatibility. They may decide that they need to rebuild the damage models, physics models, and graphics, for every airplane/object from scratch... if they are to appear in the updated engine and they'll almost certainly want to largely rebuild the terrains if they have an improved terrain engine... so a lot depends on how large a leap forward the improvements are.

 

I'm personally hoping that some components (e.g. AI) will remain in common, and that they'll be able to support the non-graphical side of Great Battles a little longer (maybe even give us larger formation sizes), and that they'll partner with a 3rd party to give us a couple of slower two-seaters for Flying Circus... that is my hope anyway. I'm also hoping that the overall market for flight-sims grow and their team is thus able to grow that they'll be able to release more content (and more obscure content) successfully. I'd love to see a WWI channel map and floatplanes/seaplanes again someday.

[76IAP-Black]

24 minutes ago, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

It seams that they are limited by current engine, which can't be uplifted just by upgrade it ,same thing as msf2020. Btw it was upgrade from ROF and current GB but they hit the wall, not all game engines are made possible to catch up for two dacades.

Im working in the IT and you can upgrade or migrate engines and modules. depends wich way you choose.
In this case the best example is DCS, they have an universal name, nothing like il2 (brand) and you fight in the Golan heights...