Presenting our new title, Korea. IL-2 Series

[LuftManu]

36 minutes ago, 356thFS_Leifr said:

 

I don't get it though LuftManu; I thought the team had been working on this for a couple of years already, and certainly seem eager enough to brag about all of the amazing features they've worked up, but everything we see in the promo is being checked as 'prototype'. This promotion has really only opened up a can of worms larger than the one before; we already knew that it was Korea, that PBR was going to be a thing, that larger AI formations were possible, and even the planeset could have been reasonably deduced. At this point, it simply looks like BoX being resold.

 

Show, don't tell.

Hi,

 

Is just that it is not finished just yet. Until they release it, things can improve or change!

Also, not everything has been shown just yet. Now the flow of DDs should start showing us all of the new things you mention 

 

[R33GZ]

1 hour ago, Avimimus said:

Is it really fair to say it 'will' be a big mistake? If they are thinking of PTO, then the same technology could be developed for Korea at some point. Saying 'will' assumes you know what the developers are doing and what they will do in the future.

My apologies, I should have said 'In my opinion'. Yes, I do believe it will be a big mistake IF a surface force is not included. Naval Aviation played a big part in the conflict.

 

1 hour ago, migmadmarine said:

Dude, this is just a first release, who's to say that module II isn't "carrier fleets" with additional USN/FAA aircraft and appropriate ships? If anything that makes good sense, to develop the new engine, setting, aircraft and feature set like radar, then once that is all established then develop carrier tech once the groundwork is in place. Trying to do that all in one go seems like a great avenue to scope creep yourself into oblivion, look at what has happened to KSP 2. 

If that is the plan, then great, that will be fantastic Im sure. Hopefully it won't be too late. Does make me wonder though, how a smaller team on a different continent is doing it.... from scratch.

 

To be frank, I didn't really see anything that looked like a new engine in these screenshots... looks a lot like GB. I'm being combative now. Sorry. Time for me to bow out before I get a Norse Ban Hammer thrown at me 😉

 

 

[LuftManu]

8 minutes ago, R33GZ said:

My apologies, I should have said 'In my opinion'. Yes, I do believe it will be a big mistake IF a surface force is not included. Naval Aviation played a big part in the conflict.

 

If that is the plan, then great, that will be fantastic Im sure. Hopefully it won't be too late. Does make me wonder though, how a smaller team on a different continent is doing it.... from scratch.

 

To be frank, I didn't really see anything that looked like a new engine in these screenshots... looks a lot like GB. I'm being combative now. Sorry. Time for me to bow out before I get a Norse Ban Hammer thrown at me 😉

 

 

Hi,

Luke said that the team is interested in having carriers, we need to wait for more information.
I guess they don't want to promise something they are not sure if they can make it just now or in time.

 

 

 

On the other hand, news such as "massive air raids on the current gen hardware thanks to simplified flight modeling of large bomber groups" are really welcomed 😁

[Gambit21]

3 minutes ago, LuftManu said:

Luke said that the team is interested in having carriers, we need to wait for more information.
I guess they don't want to promise something they are not sure if they can make it just now or in time.

 

 😁

…and what they’ll be compared to is no joke. I don’t blame them for taking their time with this. 

[LuftManu]

Just now, Gambit21 said:

…and what they’ll be compared to is no joke. I don’t blame them for taking their time with this. 

In the end, competition benefits us all.

 

Always pushing forward!

 

I'm all for it! 

[AEthelraedUnraed]

9 minutes ago, R33GZ said:

Does make me wonder though, how a smaller team on a different continent is doing it.... from scratch.

Mainly by not doing much else. Midway is only about 6km2 / 2.5mi2.

[CountZero]

2 hours ago, 356thFS_Leifr said:

 

I don't get it though LuftManu; I thought the team had been working on this for a couple of years already, and certainly seem eager enough to brag about all of the amazing features they've worked up, but everything we see in the promo is being checked as 'prototype'. This promotion has really only opened up a can of worms larger than the one before; we already knew that it was Korea, that PBR was going to be a thing, that larger AI formations were possible, and even the planeset could have been reasonably deduced. At this point, it simply looks like BoX being resold.

 

Show, don't tell.

 

for me this similaryty with what we have here is worying because of spoting, if its gona be as bad as its here, with 1000kmh jets, oh boy its gona be frustrating , i just hope spotting gets mutch better

 

[CzechTexan]

Today, June 25, is the anniversary of North Korea's invasion of South Korea in 1950.

[ST_Catchov]

7 hours ago, Avimimus said:

My two cents:

 

1) They could do a Korean War expansion - but there are only so many planes. Moving beyond 1955 means increasingly sophisticated avionics and radars... so they probably won't want to do 1967-1973... This means that, assuming they keep making flight-simulators, they will have to revisit WWII and WWI at some point in the next few years.

 

2) Furthermore, they announced some tentative plans to work with third parties to release small amounts of WWII content over the next couple of years.

 

So may advice would be: Neither panic nor despair.

 

I'll throw in a Nickel:

 

1) Jets are not my scene. 

 

2) This whole Korea thing is obviously a training run for the new hires to get up to speed for a WW1 Gulf of Venice/Isonzo map. As a sweetener. And then employ the new technology to expand into the Channel and SE England (including London). Some talk about 4 engine bombers in WWII. Don't make me larf. How about 6 engine Zeppelins! And of course, a detailed Paris where one can wander about and visit Madame Fifi's for recreational activities, after doing one's bit for the war effort. I could go on, but I'll keep it short for the limited attention span of jet lovers.

 

3) I'll need a new rig.

 

So, in summation, you are right Avimimus, there is no need to panic or despair for those of us with class and a taste for the finer things. Let the others dabble in Korea. What really matters is coming!

 

[Avimimus]

10 minutes ago, ST_Catchov said:

So, in summation, you are right Avimimus, there is no need to panic or despair for those of us with class and a taste for the finer things. Let the others dabble in Korea. What really matters is coming!

 

Such sweet words! I now officially live in your reality!

[BraveSirRobin]

1 hour ago, CountZero said:

 

but korea was big succes, ppl clearly wont more jets, lets do Nam, and after that PTO 😄

 

 

OK, Nam would be awesome if done right.  Jason is still doing PTO (hopefully).  We get more variety.   I don't see the downside. 

[LukeFF]

5 hours ago, =PCM=Newtz said:

Eh, I don’t know… these screenshots look extremely similar to Great Battles… I’m not biting the whole “new engine” discussion. Let’s see if y’all are able to model at least Incendiary ammo this time, then I’ll believe it’s a new engine

 

 

[creamersdream]

3 hours ago, Vishnu said:

Sadly, I still wish it was Malta, or North Africa.    I'm fond of WWII era planes.

 

 Me to.

3 minutes ago, creamersdream said:

 

 Me also.

 

Edited June 26, 2024 by creamersdream

[BraveSirRobin]

38 minutes ago, creamersdream said:

 

 Me to.

 

Like P-51s and Corsairs?  You’re getting them in this game.

[Rustedgun]

Very excited about this announcement. I will be thrilled to fly Korean era aircraft in an updated version of IL2

[[CPT]Crunch]

Eh, so where's the ground war?  Not enough plane types to mash out a good old air war, going to need some ground action with troops in contact and armies on the roll to get my attention, carriers are pointless without a hot ground war going on.  Until I see it nothing really capturing my interest, looks the same old dogfest.

[BraveSirRobin]

Korea is even more perfect for this franchise than I expected.  It gives some of us cool and interesting aircraft.  It gives lots of us something we really want more than a good combat flight sim.  It gives us something to complain about because we could have definitely created a better game than these developers.

[Gambit21]

La-11

Wait for it.

[-LCC-FortisOne]

I need a Bearcat so bad. No way they can skip on it. 

[DBFlyguy]

10 minutes ago, -LCC-FortisOne said:

I need a Bearcat so bad. No way they can skip on it. 

The Bearcat wasn't used in Korea so I wouldn't expect it.

 

https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval-history-magazine/1997/october/short-life

Edited June 26, 2024 by DBFlyguy

[silent_one]

Any improvements to ai planned or will it be the same flying in circles forever we saw in Il2 ?

[Dagwoodyt]

14 hours ago, 352ndOscar said:

Lest we forget….cargo aircraft and early helo types as well……

Agree that there ought to be choppers for Korea missions including to/from M.A.S.H units, ferrying supplies and retrieving downed airmen.

[CountZero]

4 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

OK, Nam would be awesome if done right.  Jason is still doing PTO (hopefully).  We get more variety.   I don't see the downside. 

oh there is big downside, there is no where to see this 3 numbers 9, 1 and 0 😄  and only BnZ airplane is Soviet 😄 

Edited June 26, 2024 by CountZero

[PivoYvo]

Looking Good ,sadly all the features i hoped for il-2 Great Battles come to a Title i won´t buy, cause i have no interest in the Korean setting.

[354thFG_Leifr]

8 hours ago, LuftManu said:

On the other hand, news such as "massive air raids on the current gen hardware thanks to simplified flight modeling of large bomber groups" are really welcomed 😁

 

Out of most of the objectives being announced with this new title, this is one of the aspects I am most excited for.

[Luger1969]

In my rush to the aircraft I missed some really good points:

 

Revamped radio comms and orders system, skip time on the route feature, walk and swim (I may doing some of that)

 

Ability to become a regiment commander and manage your unit supplies, personnel and aircraft, massive air raids on the current gen hardware thanks to simplified flight modeling of large bomber groups, functional radars, dozens of painstakingly recreated air including Tu-2 and B-29 bombers, naval and ground unit types including infantry squads to attack, protect and avoid.

 

Just a wish..AI (loyal wingman plus opponents) is always wip in any game...lets put our best foot forward

[LuftManu]

34 minutes ago, 356thFS_Leifr said:

 

Out of most of the objectives being announced with this new title, this is one of the aspects I am most excited for.

Totally agree! This alone can make intercept missions really fun. (and also I hope they also open the gate for bombers in the future as collectors and in other titles. Being part of a big formation could be really great).

I can imagine already that in the MP sceneario, with big B-29 formations, escorting them and intercepting them can already be a fun target for both sides. Also, the Superfortress can be fly really high!

 

If the team manages to tackle the GB engine limitations, it would be already a good upgrade.

 

8 hours ago, Avimimus said:

 

Such sweet words! I now officially live in your reality!

You guys are making me want WW1 again, that itch never goes away with both of you around! 😄

[w00dy]

I guess I will be able to buy Korea IL-2 on steam and then all the DLC from the IL2 store, like I did with the current game and DLC?

 

I just find it easier for updates and VR

Edited June 26, 2024 by w00dy

[Avimimus]

2 hours ago, Luger1969 said:

Revamped radio comms and orders system, skip time on the route feature, walk and swim (I may doing some of that)

 

ground unit types including infantry squads to attack, protect and avoid.

 

Oh, if they could somehow port some of these non-graphical improvements back into the Great Battles engine - I'd definitely pay for the upgrade. Flying Circus and Tank Crew would really benefit from some infantry, and it looks like they are fixing issues with bailing out over water.

 

Part of me is hoping that there is still enough similarity in the code-base that some of these upgrades could be ported back!

 

P.S. The skip time enroute feature would also see me flying a lot more campaigns (although that is almost certainly tied into the new mission structure for the new campaign and is probably incompatible with existing missions).

 

  

6 hours ago, silent_one said:

Any improvements to ai planned or will it be the same flying in circles forever we saw in Il2 ?

 

Last I heard they were still recruiting an AI programmer who could handle the complexity of flight sim AI. I wouldn't be surprised if it takes time.

 

I think there is a fundamental trade-off here between conserving energy and pulling varied maneouvres. If the AI does too many extreme maneouvres it will end up giving up speed and altitude - giving a competent play a position from which they can easily win the fight. If it tries to conserve energy, it becomes predictable. We really need AI which is better at alternating between the two modes - recovering and maintaining energy - and executing risky manoeuvres at moments where it might give it an advantage.

 

Programming that in 3d space with multiple opponents and complex physics isn't going to be easy.

 

IMHO, a faster improvement would be fixing AI spotting with more modelling of where it is looking at any given time and limits to what it can see or pay attention to in any given moment (something more like Petrovich AI in the Hind) - it'd also really improve Tank Crew. This is especially true if the AI vision was as limited by clouds and foliage as the player's vision is.

 

  

4 hours ago, PivoYvo said:

Looking Good ,sadly all the features i hoped for il-2 Great Battles come to a Title i won´t buy, cause i have no interest in the Korean setting.

 

Have you tried it though? If you've never tried a Korean Air war simulation - how can you really know?

[Hexpert07]

Will this game demand a powerful CPU? I mean will it be good enough with a ryzen 5 5500?

Edited June 26, 2024 by Hexpert07

[IckyATLAS]

12 hours ago, ST_Catchov said:

3) I'll need a new rig.

Me too! 😄 

One is planned for the end of this year depending on releases and availability.

Battle sims (mix of planes+vehicles+ships+trains+ground troops) will always be the top power cruncher for the CPU/GPU pair, due to their particular needs.

This if you play at 4K with all the graphic, visual and sound effects etc. bell and whistles set to ultramax.

In that loaded configuration target is min FPS 120. I am not too far but still not there.

 

16 hours ago, LuftManu said:

As stated, cloud, vegetation etc is all prototypes just yet.

Got it. By looking more on details yes my initial judgement was maybe a little premature. Some details are promising.

But for me the big question remains:

 

These improvements will they also be applicable to BOS,BOM,BOK,BOBp,BON?

 

The answer is of primordial importance and if positive then you have my money for Korea!

 

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

6 hours ago, PivoYvo said:

Looking Good ,sadly all the features i hoped for il-2 Great Battles come to a Title i won´t buy, cause i have no interest in the Korean setting.

Agreed.  Doesn't interest me either.

[Bell]

Wow,Korea😅Good bye.They chose Korea when there were still many theaters to choose from for WWII.

[IckyATLAS]

1 hour ago, Hexpert07 said:

Will this game demand a powerful CPU? I mean will it be good enough with a ryzen 5 5500?

I suppose this will depend first on the game, then on which GPU you run (equilibrated with CPU capability) and finally how do you want to play.

Do you want to play in 4K with maximum visual quality or you would rather play HD with minimal or medium visual quality.

 

There are many elements that may come into play and I am skeptic in general when the devs would recommend a minimum system configuration.

The question is how the Devs define the minimum acceptable quality.

The Devs need to sell a max of copies, so they will put in very minimal specs. But with experience these specs are often not good to a simmer. Sure the game will run but how? There can be nasty surprises. 

 

[Sobilak]

Hi.

Bell

I think Korea is a good chose to create new project with new features and improvements on new engine but not for make money.

 

Edited June 26, 2024 by Sobilak

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

2 hours ago, Avimimus said:

Have you tried it though? If you've never tried a Korean Air war simulation - how can you really know?

Never stuck my finger in garbage disposal either, but really certain I wouldn't like it...😉

[CountZero]

25 minutes ago, Bell said:

Wow,Korea😅Good bye.They chose Korea when there were still many theaters to choose from for WWII.

They need to atract more players, jets are made popular in recent years by WT, so its shoot in dark, if it dont work out they can just go back to ww2 nothing lost, aslo in mean time they will just keep GB active, new collector fighters, Odessa and so on... ppl who dont buy Korea will buy GB stuff

[w00dy]

17 minutes ago, CountZero said:

They need to atract more players, jets are made popular in recent years by WT, so its shoot in dark, if it dont work out they can just go back to ww2 nothing lost, aslo in mean time they will just keep GB active, new collector fighters, Odessa and so on... ppl who dont buy Korea will buy GB stuff

 

Agree, it will hopefully expand the customer base. They did it with the tanks.  

[kodam]

As a Korean(south), I appreciate that IL-2's new work is based on the Korean War.

However, on the other hand, I am worried that there will be few air battles except for the MiG Alley zone because North Korea's air force is weak.

 

Still, as I've enjoyed all the IL-2 series and Rise of Flight so far, I'm sure you'll make this new game well.

 

Anyway, I have some questions.

 

Is the camera control in IL-2 Korea the same as the GB or RoF?

As you can see from the video I recorded, in GB and RoF, I was able to move the pilot's head forward, back, left, right, up and down freely, so I was able to control the camera with just my keyboard. Equipment such as Track IR was a burden on my neck, so I really liked the GB series, which allows me to control the camera freely with just a keyboard. Thanks to this, I was able to enjoy the game enough with just the joystick and keyboard.

 

Hopefully the camera control is the same as GB.

 

 

 

The second question is, can I also proceed with career as a Republic of Korea Air Force?

It would be a great honor to be able to operate as the first Korean Air Force as a Korean.  Lieutenant Dean Hess and the Bout-1 Squadron, and F-51 Mustang emblazoned with '信念의 鳥人(Per Fidem Volo)', and the bombing of the Seunghori railway bridge. Oh, my God. It would be a tremendous touch to see these things in a game.

 

Third question is the opinion that there are too many trees in the mountain shown in the screenshot released, are you willing to reduce the amount of trees?

Since the Joseon Dynasty, there have been very few trees in the mountains because logging has been prevalent to support the large population. Then, after becoming a Japanese colony, Japan started the Pacific War and cut down even more severely, so there were no trees left in the mountains during the Korean War.

 

Last question, when will it be released? 😄

[Enceladus828]

1 hour ago, Bell said:

They chose Korea when there were still many theaters to choose from for WWII.

Not to be a sourpuss here, I really wish that the Invasion of Sicily was done after BoN before doing Korea. It would have been the perfect place to cap off the GBs series with a place that has never been properly covered before, would have given us some more Italian birds, planes for the prelude to D-Day like the Beaufighter, P-40K, Spitfire Mk. VIII and a flyable B-25. Plus we can also use the map for the Siege of Malta and would have made the MC 202 no longer a white elephant. I never bought the devs’ reasoning for not doing it because it was too urban and would require Rome. That sounded more like an excuse to that they just didn’t want to do it because Rome and Naples wouldn’t be required and the furthest north the map would extend to would be Salerno.