Presenting our new title, Korea. IL-2 Series

[LuftManu]

Just now, I/JG53_Kurtz said:

Another thought: there is something that I can not understand... If PTO is the next theatre of IL-2 series after Korea, what about PTO "Combat pilot" flight sim currently under development by Jason Williams?!

Does it mean that at some point we will have two PTO flight sims at the same time splitting the market in two parts?

 

It looks a waste of resources to me.

There is no exclusivity to make a simulator! Each developer can create the era he wants.

[Avimimus]

2 minutes ago, I/JG53_Kurtz said:

Another thought: there is something that I can not understand... If PTO is the next theatre of IL-2 series after Korea, what about PTO "Combat pilot" flight sim currently under development by Jason Williams?!

Does it mean that at some point we will have two PTO flight sims at the same time splitting the market in two parts?

 

It looks a waste of resources to me.

 

There is another thread for discussing Combat Pilot, please move any discussions about that series there.

 

This thread is for discussing Korea, not the PTO, nor projects being done by other developers.

[Hoss]

2 hours ago, SqueakyS said:

Hoping they add some non-US aircraft like the Meteor at some point. The ability to walk around is a feature I'm very much looking forward to. It was always fun in multiplayer to sit on the airfield and watch the planes taking off and landing.

The Hawker Sea Fury actually shot down a Mig in the conflict. Looks like no F9F, A-1D, Essex,or Ocean class carriers. I don't know why 1C is so afraid of Carrier ops. It will be the Achilles heel of this game.

[Aapje]

I would suggest just focusing on Korea and the new engine features for now. The next module won't be here for a while and plans may change.

1 hour ago, deathmisser said:

@LukeFF Am I correct in saying Il-2 Korea plane set be used in the standard IL-2 Great battles as FC & BO(X) modules are ? 

 

Definitely not. The new planes use new technology that needs the new game engine.

 

Similarly, old planes can't be used with the new engine without substantial rework.

[Avimimus]

3 minutes ago, Hoss said:

The Hawker Sea Fury actually shot down a Mig in the conflict. Looks like no F9F, A-1D, Essex,or Ocean class carriers. I don't know why 1C is so afraid of Carrier ops. It will be the Achilles heel of this game.

 

An interesting question: How many of these aircraft operated from land-based airfields?

[Aapje]

7 minutes ago, Hoss said:

The Hawker Sea Fury actually shot down a Mig in the conflict. Looks like no F9F, A-1D, Essex,or Ocean class carriers. I don't know why 1C is so afraid of Carrier ops. It will be the Achilles heel of this game.

 

Making a carrier and things like catapults and arresting wires work is a lot of effort.

[BlackSix]

4 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

An interesting question: How many of these aircraft operated from land-based airfields?

F9F from VMF-115 and VMF-311 USMC

F4U/AU-1 from VMF-212/VMA-212, VMF-312/VMA-312, VMF-323/VMA-323 and VMF(N)-513 USMC

F3D from VMF(N)-513 USMC

F7F from VMF(N)-513 and VMF(N)-542 USMC

🙂

[76IAP-Black]

The move to make the airforce first as a base for the Korea conflict is a nice and smart step.
You can provide a carrier DLC later. 

Im looking forward to it 

[354thFG_Leifr]

1 minute ago, 76IAP-Black said:

The move to make the airforce first as a base for the Korea conflict is a nice and smart step.
You can provide a carrier DLC later. 

Im looking forward to it 

 

Yeah, I think they might be looking to make carrier-operations a later addition with more (hopefully) American USN aircraft.

Looks neat at any rate, I hope it all pays off! I'm not super interested in the aircraft themselves for this particular theatre, but I am hopeful that 1C can finally overcome some of the difficulties BoX presents, and that it'll be a worthwhile purchase just for the technological updates.

[=EXPEND=CG_Justin]

Meh.

 

I might buy it.

[Enceladus828]

13 minutes ago, Hoss said:

I don't know why 1C is so afraid of Carrier ops. It will be the Achilles heel of this game.

We could see some US ships which saw action in the Pacific War. The devs’ plans after Korea is the Pacific where there will be carriers so they would be implemented then.

[76IAP-Black]

Was flying MiG Alley back in the days and liked it, was a bit different than what we had during this time.
Lets see what they plan and build out of this new Engine and theater

[feca1229]

Will the cockpit be clickable?

[Aapje]

Just now, feca1229 said:

Will the cockpit be clickable?

No. IL-2 tried it once and they learned to not try again.

[CountZero]

2 minutes ago, feca1229 said:

Will the cockpit be clickable?

i hope no

[szelljr]

Will be Templates for downloading ? I have biggest interest for the AI B 29.  If yes , will be PSD (2D) or something new format ?? (3D)

Edited June 25, 2024 by szelljr

[CountZero]

2 minutes ago, szelljr said:

Will be Templates for downloading ? I have biggest interest for the AI B 29. 

200GB just for B-29 skins 😄

[IckyATLAS]

Strange as most of the video is black on my screen. Is it normal. I see just water a few seconds then nothing just black, a reactor and again nothing.

Any clue?

 

[CountZero]

9 minutes ago, IckyATLAS said:

Strange as most of the video is black on my screen. Is it normal. I see just water a few seconds then nothing just black, a reactor and again nothing.

Any clue?

 

check your okulist, maybe you can see only props and your jet blind, in video is clearly more then black

[migmadmarine]

Luke, would probably be a good call to go back and link the website/text of the dev diary in the first post, seems like some don't realize those are up. 

[Juri_JS]

Will there be improvements to the map technology? The few map screenshots look mostly identical to Il2-GB.

 

[ESAflankercobra]

2 hours ago, YoYo said:

Why no any carrier? (again 😞?)

 

 

It was big a part of Korea war! Example:

https://donhollway.com/toko-ri/

 

I agree..., no carriers..., again???? what's the problem about the carries???

[Jaegermeister]

5 hours ago, Aapje said:

It's great to see that they gave some love to SP as well: "skip time on the route feature." This is probably a huge quality of life feature for SP.

This feature will certainly change how missions will have to be designed.triggers will have to be used similar to how it is done in DCS so that events still occur at the correct time even if you skip large sections of the mission. No more chain reaction scripting

[LuftManu]

22 minutes ago, Blitzen said:

Look here for something ( completely other...)

Discussion of other titles should be done in other threads

 

[ESAflankercobra]

1 hour ago, LuftManu said:

There is no exclusivity to make a simulator! Each developer can create the era he wants.

 

I think that 1C is not going to develop the PTO, it should first be able to simulate onboard operations. In the case of Korea it can be launched without simulating aircraft carriers, something risky for the fidelity that has always been a characteristic of the Il2 series, but in the PTO not simulating aircraft carriers would be very crazy

[LuftManu]

11 minutes ago, Juri_JS said:

Will there be improvements to the map technology? The few map screenshots look mostly identical to Il2-GB.

 

I've seen no edges on the distance in this screenshot. Some edges can appear on GB with a wide FOV. 
So I think yes.

 

Just now, ESAflankercobra said:

 

I think that 1C is not going to develop the PTO, it should first be able to simulate onboard operations. In the case of Korea it can be launched without simulating aircraft carriers, something risky for the fidelity that has always been a characteristic of the Il2 series, but in the PTO not simulating aircraft carriers would be very crazy

Hi,

1CGS did not comment yet on this. We have to wait for DDs to have more info about units and other assets.
Not even the "After this we go to PTO" is an official statement or a plan written in stone.

Carrier tech was mentioned long time ago and that work must be done to be able to represent that, I hope we get to that point if we aren't there yet and we just don't know it.

[Gambit21]

15 minutes ago, Juri_JS said:

Will there be improvements to the map technology? The few map screenshots look mostly identical to Il2-GB.

 

That was my observation as well.

 

 

[ESAflankercobra]

4 minutes ago, LuftManu said:

I've seen no edges on the distance in this screenshot. Some edges can appear on GB with a wide FOV. 
So I think yes.

 

Hi,

1CGS did not comment yet on this. We have to wait for DDs to have more info about units and other assets.
Not even the "After this we go to PTO" is an official statement or a plan written in stone.

Carrier tech was mentioned long time ago and that work must be done to be able to represent that, I hope we get to that point if we aren't there yet and we just don't know it.

That is why I said that "I think", the necessary development of technology to create ship-based operations was already the excuse to delay the work on the Pacific and in the end we know what happened.

The fact that in this thread they have already answered naming USMC units that operated from the ground is what you and I know as "lanzar balones fuera"; and although it hurts us, Korea without an aircraft carrier... would be a negative point; Let's hope that in the next development update they announce otherwise.

[354thFG_Leifr]

11 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

That was my observation as well.

 

It looks almost identical to BoX. There's no perceived depth in the ocean at all, it looks very flat and mundane.

Edited June 25, 2024 by 356thFS_Leifr

[RealDarko]

Count me in! Hope to see the Texan and the Banshee at some point.

[deathmisser]

Btw has anyone noticed this ? 

 

Ability to enter and exit the cockpit, walk and swim

devices and gamepads, mouse-free experience in VR, intelligent sortie recording and playback.

"

Edited June 25, 2024 by deathmisser

[Regingrave-]

25 минут назад, Juri_JS сказал:

Will there be improvements to the map technology? The few map screenshots look mostly identical to Il2-GB.

There are huge improvements already. Map textures and vegetation models on the screenshots are prototypes, and there are several new technologies we're adding to make map scenery more live and detailed, like 3D railroads you can see on other screenshots, tunnels, craters, city lights and so on.

More details will be revealed in coming DDs, we sure have much to show you.

[=621=Samikatz]

It's the very first reveal of a new game, one that will certainly gain many features as it's developed before and after launch. Think about how little BoS had in 2014 compared to what we can play now, writing it off as doomed because the very first dev diary doesn't list every single feature you want is silly

 

Personally I'm very excited, plenty of interesting aircraft operated over Korea and I hope the project is successful enough to get expansions

[Juri_JS]

20 minutes ago, Regingrave said:

There are huge improvements already. Map textures and vegetation models on the screenshots are prototypes, and there are several new technologies we're adding to make map scenery more live and detailed, like 3D railroads you can see on other screenshots, tunnels, craters, city lights and so on.

More details will be revealed in coming DDs, we sure have much to show you.

Great to hear. What's missing most in the map screenshots are agricultural fields that should cover most of the valleys and lowlands outside urban areas.

 

Edited June 25, 2024 by Juri_JS

[BlitzPig_EL]

Curious how F86A will compete against Mig15Bis.  How much overlap in deployment of the A model with later, more capable F86 types?

 

Otherwise very excited for this new sim.  Can't wait.

[CountZero]

1 minute ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Curious how F86A will compete against Mig15Bis.  How much overlap in deployment of the A model with later, more capable F86 types?

 

Otherwise very excited for this new sim.  Can't wait.

it dosent have stronger engine, it cant pull out of dives as it dont have all moving tail, its slower and less capable to fight at high alts compared to E models.

 

for me that was also strange , to go for A insted E , its like go for 51C insted D model in BoP, 

 

BlackSix explained why but for me when you have only earlyer jets like F-80 and probably F-84, why go for 3rd early war jet when your timeline alows you to pick better matchup for your main two airplanes

[Avimimus]

2 hours ago, BlackSix said:

F9F from VMF-115 and VMF-311 USMC

F4U/AU-1 from VMF-212/VMA-212, VMF-312/VMA-312, VMF-323/VMA-323 and VMF(N)-513 USMC

F3D from VMF(N)-513 USMC

F7F from VMF(N)-513 and VMF(N)-542 USMC

🙂

 

Very interesting! I take it the F7F operated only as night fighters? Also Seafuries were only used from carriers?

 

 

10 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Curious how F86A will compete against Mig15Bis.  How much overlap in deployment of the A model with later, more capable F86 types?

 

Otherwise very excited for this new sim.  Can't wait.

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/88651-any-word-on-the-next-project/?do=findComment&comment=1320390

[=621=Samikatz]

4 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Curious how F86A will compete against Mig15Bis.  How much overlap in deployment of the A model with later, more capable F86 types?

 

Otherwise very excited for this new sim.  Can't wait.

 

The MiG-15bis entered Korea before the Sabre A did. They're definitely comptemporary aircraft with notable advantages for the Sabre like the ranging gunsight, G-suit, roll rate, and top speed, so I don't think the Sabre will struggle, far from it. I imagine later models will be quick to follow once the base set of aircraft is out, too

[creamersdream]

Korea isn't really my cup of tea either.

[tattywelshie]

1 hour ago, Juri_JS said:

Will there be improvements to the map technology? The few map screenshots look mostly identical to Il2-GB.

 

Yeah I must say…I’m a tad underwhelmed by the graphics so far tbh, there was talk of it being better than DCS…but it basically looks like the current engine with just a slight update. Maybe the screenshots are of it on an older engine or something?